Thoughts of a Common Pakistani —– LUTAIRAY PARLIAMENTARIANS versus QAUMI CRUSADERS

DONT TEST PAKISTANIS ANGER.THEY WILL WIPE WADERA, INDUSTRIALIST,JAGIRDAR, ELITE CULTURE OUT!

Subject: RE: A LAWYER PLEADING THAT HIS CLIENT IS A PIR & GADDI NASHIN AND SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN ORDINARY PEOPLE
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 18:39:44 +0500

However, Barrister Aitzaz touched new heights of judicial decadence
when he pleaded that his client being a “pir” and a “gaddi nashin”
should be treated differently from ordinary citizens, notwithstanding
the offence. Mercifully, he did not demand that the seven judges come
down from their raised platform to kiss the hands and touch the feet
of the accused even before beginning to hear the first argument.

Coming from someone considered Pakistan’s leading lawyer and a
champion of democracy, such an undemocratic and dynastic statement
reflects the reality and the nature of politics and society in
Pakistan. It confirms that the change that an average Pakistani is
looking for is not around the bend. Not only that, the voter is
inextricably bound in the chains of the landlord, the “pir,” the
“gaddi nashin,” the sardars, the biradari, of those wielding sectarian
and ethnic influence. But the ruling classes are equally united in
their manipulative devices to sanctify these undemocratic and dynastic
institutions.

Acid-attack victim Fakhra committed suicide by jumping from her
6th-floor apartment in Rome. Ironically, her suicide comes in the wake
of our new legislation against acid-throwing and Chinoy’s
Oscar-winning film Saving Face. Clearly, neither the laws nor Saving
Face could save Fakhra’s face or her life. Our focus lies only in
awards, ceremonies and seminars, and not on putting an end to the
tragedies displayed in the film.

So, somewhere in the bar rooms, another worthy barrister must be
getting ready to defend the rich acid-thrower, Bilal Khar. After all,
Khar, son of Ghulam Mustafa Khar, is a scion of a powerful political
dynasty of the landed “waderas” of Pakistan, and, to go by the above
mentioned legal reasoning, he cannot be equated with those petty
street acid-throwers.

Pakistan is caught in a time warp and the prognosis is not cheerful.
Its poor masses have been kept too backward and uneducated to do
anything for their own betterment and the ruling cartel is too happy
to exploit its monopoly. The second and third generation of the ruling
elite is being groomed to take over and prove that their elders were
novices in the art of plunder.

The educated professional class is happy to sit on the sidelines since
it can have all the fun without sharing any responsibility. When
sufficiently motivated it could even invent excuses which have nothing
to do with jurisprudence, like as to why a “pir” should not be
punished.

So where do we go from here? Is there a political party that is
willing to be the party of ordinary people? One that is willing to
nominate no candidate who is a “sardar,” “wadera,” or “pir,” or whose
claim to fame is his political or “spiritual” lineage?

Pakistanis should not expect reforms from leaders unwilling to reform
themselves or their parties. Those who proceed abroad for medical
treatment (at state expense) in specially chartered airliners are not
likely to spend much time on improving the local hospitals. Likewise,
those whose hands are kissed and feet are touched by the mindless
millions are not likely to exhibit democratic or egalitarian
behaviour.

It is astonishing that the educated elite of Pakistan is always so
ready to defend the cesspool that our politics has become, but not
willing to organise and push for much-needed reforms. These reforms
are urgently needed in the dynastic and political parties collecting
“bhatta” (extortion money), the atrophied Election Commission, the
non-functional educational system and the justice system working at
snail’s space, to name a few.

The parties must declare that henceforth they will not accept
candidates who use titles like “sajjada nashin,” “pir’, “sardar,”
“gaddi nashin” and “wadera,” or those who receive “offerings” and
“nazranas.” Their candidates will not have fake degrees, will not
collect “bhatta,” will not be foreign nationals and will voluntarily
surrender all weapons that they hold.

The Election Commission could learn a lesson or two from its Indian
counterpart. How come civil society accepted the election involving 37
million fake votes? Without batting an eyelid, without demanding
accountability or overhaul of the electoral process?

Clearly, the educated, rich and powerful segments of civil society has
sided with the status quo by refusing to grow out of its
foreign-funded seminar mode. Not protesting to eliminate the root
causes (such as official proliferation of weapons) and hoping to
achieve peace through candlelit vigils is neither rational nor likely
to make an iota of difference to the situation.

Anonymous