THE government has attempted to file a petition in the Supreme Court, invoking an unheard of legal remedy, to challenge the apex court’s judgement on the review petition in the Justice Qazi Faez Isa case. Now the petition, filed under the term ‘curative review petition’ has been returned by the Supreme Court registrar office on the grounds that a second review petition could not be filed to challenge a decision that had come on a review petition.
This petition was moved on behalf of the federation but the attorney general has distanced himself from the pleas saying he was not in the picture. A spokesman of the law ministry, however, said the petition would be filed again after addressing the registrar office’s objections.
Senior lawyers have also opined that such a petition does not hold much legal weight once the Supreme Court has already issued a judgement on the review petition of Justice Isa. It is therefore surprising that the government is insisting on pursuing the matter against Justice Isa when the court has clearly stated that the case built by the government against him has no legal standing.
Since the court took up the case almost every aspect of the allegations against him have been dissected threadbare and every feasible piece of evidence has been examined in great detail. Justice Isa and his wife have presented whatever paper trail was required of them while the government’s legal team also got full opportunity to build a case against the judge.
These exhaustive proceedings have finally led to a decision in Justice Isa’s review petition by a 10-member bench. The judgement clearly exonerates the judge of all charges. This should be the end of the matter, not just because it brings to a close the legal process, but also due to the fact that it has exacted a heavy cost on the institution of the judiciary itself.
It is heartening that the highest court in the land opened itself up for accountability, but now that the decision is final, the sad chapter should stand closed.
This is why it is inadvisable for the government to rake up the matter. The move smacks of desperation, whereas it is now time for acceptance. The government should let the matter rest and move on. No one benefits if the judiciary is dragged back into a public controversy that has run its legal course.
Food insecurity
THE increase in the numbers of food-insecure people in this country speaks much louder than official claims of economic growth. According to the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement, 16.4 out of every 100 households surveyed during the fiscal year 2019-2020 reported moderate to severe food insecurity. The number was slightly higher than the 15.9pc food-insecure households a year before. Apparently, the latest PSLM was carried out by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics before the country went into lockdown for a few months towards the end of March 2020 to halt the spread of Covid-19. Or the findings could have been more dismal. Thus, it is safe to assume that the survey is reflecting only the impacts of job losses, income reduction and IMF-mandated economic stabilisation policies on the lives of the poor and marginalised communities across the rural-urban and provincial divides. However, the fact that almost 30pc of Balochistan’s population had reported food insecurity underlines the effects of climate change on agriculture and different food security levels in different regions. There is no doubt that intermittent periods of drought over several years have not only pushed up poverty levels in various regions of Balochistan but have also increased the size of the food-insecure population.
Food insecurity is not just about food shortage in the market. It also signifies the absence of sufficient money to buy food, let alone nutritious, wholesome food. It’s not surprising that the high food inflation experienced during the last two years has played a major role in increasing the numbers of the food-insecure population. The survey mostly gives only a sketchy picture of the situation without listing details about or profiling food-insecure households and individuals. Yet we know from anecdotal evidence that food insecurity does not affect all members of a family or household equally; women and children are more prone to suffer hunger than adult male relatives. It is also seen that those living in poorer districts, regions or neighbourhoods face greater food insecurity for longer periods than others. That also explains the increasing migration of the rural labour force to cities and peri-urban areas for better incomes.
The issue is connected to not just economic growth and agricultural performance but also the growing regional economic and development gap, which has increased gender inequalities in the access to education, health, public facilities, and generally equal opportunities in life. Indeed, it is important to grow the economy for creating jobs and bridging income gaps so that the maximum number of people can access healthy food. But the kind of growth our economic and financial policies produce have only widened social and economic inequalities and increased the food-insecure numbers. With the budget around the corner, there is an opportunity for the government to tweak its policies for slightly more equitable economic growth and wealth distribution.
Anti-tobacco award
SOMEHOW there are gaps in the picture. The WHO award to Pakistan for undertaking an effective campaign against tobacco has come as a pleasant surprise to many in a country where smoking is rampant. However, it is fair to ask in what manner the country has benefited from the anti-tobacco drive and to what extent has the consumption of the noxious substance been curtailed. As the Ministry of National Health Services receives its award on May 31, which is celebrated as World No Tobacco Day, it would do well to mull over the situation and not rest on its recent laurels. For instance, it has been estimated that tobacco consumers in the country number 30m and cost the exchequer Rs615bn in terms of the health burden — by no means a small amount for a country whose healthcare facilities are already overstretched. However, the government has been lauded for, among other steps, making Islamabad a ‘tobacco-smoke-free city’ by designating 304 localities and parks as smoke-free in 12 districts. Tobacco sellers have also been registered under this project, while the health ministry has prohibited all kinds of advertising, promotions and sponsorship of tobacco products on point of sale as well as on social media.
And yet the reality on the ground points in another, troubling direction. Access to smoking products is easy and the availability of the ostensibly banned single cigarettes is especially tempting for students and other young people. Meanwhile, anti-tobacco activists have rightly criticised the authorities for their lax tax policies towards the tobacco industry that help the latter earn huge profits. Indeed, there have been no increased taxes on tobacco products in the past four years whereas the price of other basic commodities has surged. In such a situation, how can the government’s goal of cutting the number of tobacco users by 30pc by 2025 be considered realistic? A rethink is needed on how to act on its intentions and enforce the measures that the government says will curb the use of tobacco.
