We often witness cases of, from the sublime to the ridiculous. Until a few days ago at the utility stores, people were allowed to buy sugar only if they bought other items too, mostly shampoo. Large-scale and mini-scale corruptions in government organisations keep on emerging with disgusting regularity. At a recent meeting of the Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly, it was revealed that the Utility Stores Corporation (USC) has suffered a loss of Rs680 million in the period 2015-2020. Only half a dozen of ‘ingenious’ employees alone have inflicted a loss of Rs21 million on the USC. So far one-third of the misappropriated amount has been recovered. Another Rs150 million have evaporated in 30 of the 34 regions of the organisation.
The Federal Investigation Agency has been entrusted with conducting investigations into the embezzlement of funds. The agency is probing 96 cases of corruption in the USC. The latest audit report has found a comparatively small amount of misappropriation of the USC funds though, the number of inquiries shows that corruption is deeper in the organisation, which is meant to provide people with daily-use items at lower prices. Another negative aspect of the issue is that the FIA has been carrying out its task at a snail’s pace, on the plea that it is too occupied with investigations into the sugar scandal.
The PAC has given vent to its annoyance with the performance of the FIA and NAB over the sluggish progress in the investigations into USC corruption cases. Inordinate delays in probing corruption cases provide the culprits time to evade the due process of law, and thus all efforts to catch them come to nought. This prolonged process of inquiry inflicts severe harm on the exchequer and resultantly on the common people. Only the masses suffer in consequence of the tiring procedures of investigations and procedures. It is a cruel irony that we all see thievery but thieves remain invisible and elusive.
Bye-elections and PTI
Bye-elections are kind of easy pickings for the ruling party. Voters in a bye-election generally side with the candidate belonging to the party in power out of their belief that he would be better placed than any other candidate to address their problems and carry out development activities in their area. Besides, there is a natural affinity between the ruling party and a strong candidate in a constituency, and a tie-up between the two makes a bye-election contest easier to win.
The PTI has, however, turned out to be an exception. Of a total of 16 bye-elections to the national and provincial assemblies so far, the Imran Khan-led party has been able to win just four. The party’s performance in the recent times is even worse: of the eight bye-elections in about last six months, it has won just one, in NA-45 Kurrum. The rest of the contests – in NA-245 Karachi, NA-75 Daska, PP-84 Khushab, PB-20 Pishin, PS-43 Sanghar, PP-51 Gujranwala, PK-63 Nowshera and PS-88 Malir, Karachi – culminated in the PTI’s defeat.
This shows that the PTI has been losing its appeal in all four provinces. Some of the defeats must serve as an eye-opener, like on the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa assembly seat from Nowshera, the home town of former chief minister Pervez Khattak. The loss of the National Assembly seat from Karachi – vacated by MNA Faisal Vawda, now a Senator – is also a huge setback for the PTI, more so because the party finished as low as fifth in the race. In Daska too, the huge margin of defeat – 16,642 votes – is indeed embarrassing.
That the PTI’s mishandling of the economy – reflected in an unprecedented price hike, exorbitant raise in electricity and gas tariffs, job losses, pay-cuts, etc – has been a major factor behind people losing faith in the leadership of Prime Minister Imran Khan. Besides, most of his promises – like those concerning 10 million jobs and 5 million houses for low-income families, police and FBR reforms, accountability for all, etc – have remained a pipe dream.
With a little over two years to go for the completion of its term, the ruling PTI must focus all its attention on providing financial relief to the common man, and at least lay the foundation for the reforms Imran Khan had pledged before coming to power.
Crushing dissent
A recent report by the International Service for Human Rights has revealed that almost half of the countries serving on the 47-member UN Human Rights Council were responsible for reprisals against human rights activists, lawyers and members of civil society that collaborated with UN bodies regarding rights abuses. These activists were targeted through acts of defamation, violent attacks, torture, arrests, travel restrictions and damage to private property. The 709 cases of reprisals from 2010 to 2020 also included actions of prevention and intimidation of activists attending UN council meetings, violating Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The study has rightly called out nation states such as India, Israel, the Philippines, Egypt, Venezuela, Bahrain, and the US for trying to prevent civil society members and activists from reporting on rights violations and abuses, ironically, by further violating the rights of these defenders. Other than violating national laws, these reprisals are also a violation of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders which “recognises the right of human rights defenders to protection from reprisals for their communication or cooperation, or attempted communication or cooperation, with the UN’s human rights bodies”. An important aspect to note is that self-censorship by rights defenders for fear of reprisal has spared many countries from being named in the list. Yet, the UN cannot discount this and must act to ensure transparency of human rights records.
The study has also called out senior UN officials for not addressing the issue in public, which could add to the pressure on the respective governments. As all other UN bodies, it seems that the HRC also only functions along the lines of realism and nationalism, where nation states are busy strengthening their fort walls against criticism by suppressing dissenting voices, while pointing fingers at others – that too either because the country happens to be a rival or because their representative took a personal interest in the case.
