Overzealous state
INSTEAD of addressing the core issues that fuel discontent amongst the citizenry, the state prefers to go after those who highlight and criticise its deficiencies. This is borne out by the case of Kashmiri poet Ahmed Farhad Shah. Mr Shah was reportedly picked up from his Islamabad home on May 15 and ‘surfaced’ two weeks later in an Azad Kashmir village after the Islamabad High Court was approached to seek his whereabouts. The poet remains in detention, denied bail, and faces a slew of charges, including in the Anti-Terrorism Act. His apparent ‘crime’ is the fact that he published material linked to the anti-government protests that had rocked AJK last month, with prosecutors alleging Mr Shah ‘incited hatred’. His counsel have argued that the poet was in Islamabad at the time of the alleged offence in Muzaffarabad.
Ahmed Farhad Shah is not the first critical voice to be detained for simply voicing an opinion. Over the decades, countless poets, writers, journalists and political activists have been hauled up under similarly ominous charges. Terrorism charges are an extreme overreaction to publishing a poem or a critical social media post. Moreover, the way in which the poet was apprehended, and later ‘surfaced’, speaks of the dubious methods the state employs against dissidents, while circumventing due process. Instead of hunting down dissenting voices, and accusing them of spreading violence, the government does little about those sectarian and communal groups whose actual bread and butter revolves around promoting hatred. The state should consider dropping the extreme charges levelled against Mr Shah and let him return to his family. Sadly, instead of honestly confronting the economic and other issues that are fuelling discontent in AJK, Gilgit-Baltistan, Balochistan and elsewhere, the state prefers to deal with the symptoms and not the cause of the malaise. After decades of applying failed prescriptions, it is time for a new approach to alleviate popular concerns.
Published in Dawn, June 7th, 2024
Averting disaster
PAKISTAN stands on the precipice of yet another potential flood disaster. According to the National Disaster Management Authority, the country is likely to experience 40-60pc more rainfall than usual during the coming monsoon season. This excess precipitation, coupled with melting glaciers and a westerly weather system, are said to have the potential to trigger flooding reminiscent of the devastating 2014 floods which claimed 367 lives. The abnormal rains are expected to begin on July 25 and persist into August, threatening to inundate northern Punjab and its eastern rivers — Ravi, Jhelum, and Chenab. Additionally, flash floods are anticipated in the northern regions due to four forecasted Glacial Lake Outburst Flood events. These floods, while expected to be less severe than the catastrophic floods in 2010 and 2022, still pose a substantial threat. The 2010 floods affected over 20m people, causing nearly 2,000 deaths and significant infrastructure damage. Similarly, the 2022 deluge resulted in 1,696 fatalities, injuries to 12,867 individuals, and affected 33m people, decimating over 4m acres of crops and 1m livestock. These events underscore the impact of climate-induced disasters on Pakistan’s population and economy. As things stand, we can ill afford another one of such magnitude.
With the anticipated floods less than two months away, we must prepare by briskly implementing several key measures. To begin with, the government should expedite the reinforcement of embankments and drainage systems in vulnerable areas to prevent overflow and waterlogging. In addition, conducting public awareness campaigns is essential to educate communities on emergency procedures and evacuation routes. Moreover, pre-positioning relief supplies, such as food, water, medical kits, and temporary shelters, in strategic locations will ensure rapid distribution during crises. Strengthening early warning systems to provide timely and accurate flood forecasts will enable proactive evacuations. It is commendable that the NDMA has endeavoured to get ahead of the situation. It conducted multi-hazard simulation drills focused on improving coordination among provincial disaster management agencies and showcased mock responses to simulated scenarios. By learning from past experiences — the most recent cataclysm was less than two years ago — Pakistan can better protect its citizens and minimise the devastating effects of natural disasters. The time to act is now, before the rains hit and history repeats itself.
Published in Dawn, June 7th, 2024
Addressing contempt
THE judiciary should have long ago redrawn the line that separates acceptable and unacceptable criticism. It is realising quite belatedly that matters have gone too far.
As the Supreme Court proceeds in its contempt case against Senator Faisal Vawda and MNA Mustafa Kamal, 34 television channels have been issued show-cause notices for airing problematic remarks made by the two lawmakers, ostensibly in violation of broadcast regulations.
Some weeks ago, Messrs Vawda and Kamal had, on separate occasions, made several insinuations regarding the judiciary. Their remarks were aired live by many news channels, prompting concerns over what, prima facie, seemed to be an open attack on senior judges. The incident prompted the SC to take notice and summon the two lawmakers for an explanation.
While Mr Kamal subsequently attempted an apology, Mr Vawda has not appeared remorseful. It may be recalled that Mr Vawda doubled down on his stance some two weeks ago in a speech he made in the Senate, in which, protected by House privileges, he said he stood by every word uttered in his press conference. Another senator also seized the occasion to level his own condemnations against the judiciary.
Separately, a bill was presented to the National Assembly secretariat seeking a bar on individuals with dual nationality from serving in the judiciary, ostensibly to target a justice of the Islamabad High Court. Given the context in which these developments took place, the SC had to take a forceful stand. It must now take this case to its logical conclusion.
The TV channels that have been put on notice must explain themselves and commit to following broadcast regulations, while errant lawmakers must pay a price for their ad hominem attacks. It has been noticed that, in recent years, prominent individuals have taken to assailing the judiciary whenever rulings have gone against them. This has slowly given rise to a culture normalising contempt. It is imperative that this culture be dismantled and the boundaries of acceptable criticism defined once again.
Lastly, it is encouraging to note that the judiciary, while demonstrating more strictness on the matter of contempt, is taking a measured approach to rectifying the problem.
Pemra, which had earlier issued a blanket ban on the coverage of court proceedings in its ‘over-efficient’ response to the court’s concerns, has been admonished for an illogical order. The apex court has warned it against “creating hurdles in the way of court proceedings” and promised action if it did not comply. Separately, the IHC chief justice has also reaffirmed the media’s right to report fairly on ongoing proceedings.
Pemra should now withdraw its order forthwith and let the media do its job. Its strange diktat has caused enough trouble for reporters merely covering their beat.
Published in Dawn, June 7th, 2024