Parliamentary practices

 

 

 

 It is very important that when we discuss parliamentary supremacy we should have a clear idea of parliamentary practices and norms being duly followed in parliament. Without this it is impossible to claim that we have accomplished parliamentary supremacy and parliamentary institutional strengthening. I have only spent a little over one year in parliament but that has made me realize that parliamentary norms when not followed create chaos and civilian dictatorship.

 

My first training in parliamentary practice was given to me by former MNA (late) Mr MP Bhandara and Senator Bhinder of PML. Mr Bhandara presented me with Kaul (Indian parliamentary practices) and my legal friends gave me a copy of Erskine May (UK parliamentary procedure). I was presented my first copy of the constitution by my father Senator Memon many years back. And the Rules of Procedure & Conduct of Business 2007 by the Assembly. These formulate my source points for learning what is correct parliamentary practice from a theoretical point of view.

 

In my last one year of parliament I have tried to consult these valuable sources and quote from them but frankly to no avail because the atmosphere in the assembly does not support such practice. Let’s discuss what actually happens in the assembly.

 

Point of orders as given in assembly to all of us including myself are by far the most misused of the tools of parliamentary practice. Conceptually they are there to discuss procedures and not to discuss substantive arguments on a motion resolution or question. There are separate tools to discuss constituency issues and misgovernance issues of the government. But those are never exercised and instead its one big scramble for points of orders. After all when parliamentary practice was formed there must have been some reason why every other tool was created like adjournment, calling attention, question hour rather than lump everything in point of order.  Moreover, the constituency issues whch are critical once raised go unattended since no minister actually takes notice and does a follow up fix it on it.

 

In order to gag opposition the best excuse used is to say a motion is inadmissible because correct procedure was not used even when that procedure was followed to the letter. This falls within the practice of encouraging an atmosphere where certain members of government can indulge in civilian dictatorship. If a privilege motion having been admitted, read by the member, withdrawn by the same member can be expunged when there is no cause for expunction then I rest my case. Or more so when opposition member’s privilege motions are not allowed for presentation in front of assembly that in itself is a privilege issue. Or when senior officials of the assembly suggest that privilege motions should be moved as point of orders that’s an even bigger cause of concern.

 

The point is why are rules twisted to suit government by every successive government. I am sure we must have done the same in our time. That doesn’t make it right. It’s done because there is a fear of discussing the truth. Because there is a twisted belief that opposition criticizes for the sake of criticism. Frankly we don’t have the time to do so. Some of us are on a mission to fix Pakistan. And some of us only criticize to fix the injustices. The struggle of fixing whilst in opposition is greater than whilst in government. Imagine if you are in government and you have a will to fix. You can succeed most easily with a sign of a pen.

 

The expunction phobia is getting the better of the government these days. Every time there is any criticism however civilized on the senior leadership, it is expunged. Let it be clear that there needs to be tolerance for listening to criticism. Nobody is abusing, we are just criticizing on policy not personality. Technically the Speaker can only conduct expunction when in his/her opinion words used are defamatory, indecent or unparliamentary or undignified. Secondly I have noticed that criteria for expunction is leadership specific. On their own leadership criticism is not acceptable. But on previous leaderships which were not associated with them any kind of abuse is acceptable and recorded on the microphone of the assembly. This discrimination also needs to be fixed.

 

Legislation passed by this assembly was only 4 pieces last year of a house of 342. I was grateful and honored that mine was one of them. We need to move towards more legislation this year. And to start with we need to implement rules of procedure for all and not for the select opposition parliamentarians. Only then will be believe that the days of civilian dictatorship are over. And where a few of the ministerial stooges of the cabinet don’t hijack rules of procedure for their vested interests. Lets be just please in following rules of procedures for parliamentary strengthening for all and not just a few.

 

fata reforms

FATA Reform process

On day one the PM announced the abolition of the FCR and then it was all talk and no action. It is crucial that the people of Pakistan understand the importance of mainstreaming of FATA and what the people of FATA want. If we agree to give them what they don’t want the process will create no positive results. Based on the recommendations facilitated by NDI and political parties the following conclusions are being presented to you. The same needs to be debated in parliament immediately so process starst rather than we waste time

Firstly there is no doubt in my mind that the sooner FATA is integrated the sooner there can be long lasting peace in the area. Secondly it must be done in phases and those phases given proper timelines. If we only stop at preliminary mainstreaming since we are worried that at this stage there is no capacity of complete mainstreaming absorption we will be doing injustice to entire Pak. Thirdly discussing and understanding FATA reforms is critical for all Pakistanis because now they affect security of entire Pakistan.

Thus as a first step we must ask for the jurisdiction of the constitution of Pakistan to be extended to FATA. With this FATA will get freedoms of expression, association, rule of law, access to justice and sanctity of property of life and property. Whilst we would prefer to repeal the FCR completely the people of the area prefer a heavy amendment. Even for this a phased process is necessary. Why live with a FCR which is offensive to all forms of human rights.

The people of the area prefer a judicial system which gives them a choice of choosing from Riwaj, Shariah, or civil laws. Conceptually this is unacceptable. In phase one maybe its ok but phasing needs to explain how eventually the judicial system will be at par with rest of country. Even interior Sindh had FCR but eventually this was removed and riwaj was replaced by civil procedure. In my just Pakistan I cant come to erms with parallel systems of governance.

The jurisdiction of Peshawer HC and Supreme Court should be extended to FATA. FATA courts need to be set up as courts of first instance for settlement of disputes on basis of civil law and to act as appellate court for jirga decisions.

The law and order system should eventually look like any other district of Pakistan with police. However in phase one Khassadar and levies should be made regular forces with sufficient training and equipment.

As far as devolution is concerned the same Local government system should be extended to FATA with a two tier system of Agency and Tehsil Council.

The most important element of this reform and mainstreaming process is the creating of a provincial assembly equivalent. This can either be called in Phase one the FATA Council and then once FATA decides to be independent province it can be an assembly. Similarly if the Council decides to merge with NWFP then additional seats can be given to FATA reps in the NWFP provincial assembly. Either way an elected Council voted in by adult franchise is critical which can then decide future of its peoples.

Women should have reserved seat quota in this Council just like in other provincial assemblies. And the same should be the case for minorities.

The Political Parties Act should be extended to the tribal areas. This is a consensus demand that would give people freedom of association.

Once there is an elected Council it is only natural that the FATA Secretariat reports into it. Like a Chief Secretary of a province reports to the Chief Minister for the Province. Eventually the concept of political agent needs to be diluted.

As far as development is concerned let there be no doubt that the millions coming as foreign aid need to be transparently spent

In my quest for a just, developed and moderate Pakistan I need FATA mainstreamed. I need the phase one to start immediately and the Phase mainstreamed to happened equally soon. I am in a hurry because every minute lost is taking me further away from my model of Pakistan. I urge all of you to think about this subject and urge the government to take the tough decisions but the right decisions.

 

articles

Article on US aid legislation – Pak media in US

Article on Obama commitments – urdu print

Poem on budget – Urdu print

(need to be updated on web)

 

Jan 2008

 

Nuclear Pakistan – realities versus myths

By Marvi Memon

 

There is no dearth of allegations in Western media that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are exposed to extremist control and that political instability in Pakistan is exposing the world to a disaster. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such fears are misguided and are either the result of lack of information or vested interests determined to destabilize Pakistan. With President Musharraf taking charge of governance in 1999, the nuclear assets’ institutionalization was set as a key priority and in due course successfully accomplished. Recently the Carnegie Institute has confirmed that “the security of these assets has improved dramatically as a result of the protective measures put in place since the late 1990s”. This is no doubt an important recognition for Pakistan.

 

The history of Pakistan’s nuclear program dates to 1972 after the setback of the 1971 war with India. Real work started on it in 1975 after Indian tests of May 1974. Thus it can be seen as a reaction for security rather than a proactive provocation. In this period the program’s strength drew from its secrecy thus institutionalization was not a possibility. Come May 1998, the secrecy ended and after Indian nuclear tests, Pakistan entered the exclusive club, thus making institutionalization critical.

 

Today Pakistan’s command control of its nuclear assets is based on the following well planned Tiers: The National Commend Authority (NCA) as Tier 1, the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) as Tier 2, and the Strategic Forces Commands (SFC) as Tier 3. Seeing the need to give legal cover to the NCA, The President promulgated National Command Authority Ordinance 2007 last month.

 

Firstly, the NCA as Tier 1 comprises of the top ten political and military decision makers in Pakistan. Its objective as an apex decision making body is to formulate policy and centrally control all aspects of Pakistan’s nuclear capability including deployment. Its Chairman is the President, duly elected by parliament, and the Prime Minister is Vice-Chairman, directly elected by the people of Pakistan. Under the NCA come two committees. The Employment Control Committee (ECC) with its deputy Chairman being the Foreign Minister and members being Minister for Defence, Interior and Finance on the political side; and the Joint Chief of all the services (CJCSC), the Army (COAS), Navy (CNS), Air chief (CAS) on the military side. This balance between top military officers and elected representatives is critical for the NCA’s smooth functioning and credibility. The other committee is the Development Control Committee with the CJCSC being its Deputy Chairman and members being the COAS, CNS, CAS and heads of strategic scientific organizations. The SPD serves as secretariat for both.

 

Whilst the Employment Control Committee reviews latest information on threats, decides on appropriate response, gives policy directions, it also has the authority to order, control, and direct use of tri-services strategic forces during war. The Development Control committee as a subordinate of the NCA oversees the implementation of the decision of the ECC and exercises day to day technical, financial and administrative control over the strategic organizations. A quick glance through their members will confirm that extremist forces cannot enter this decision making grid at any point in Pakistan’s history. They are individuals who have been either elected or have risen up the ranks of military organizations. Extremists can definitely not enter this grid through elections as they have no representation within parliament as history shows. Pakistan’s voters have never allowed them any representation and religious parties who have been given representation by the people of Pakistan have disassociated themselves from such extremist elements.

 

Tier 2 is the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) which is the secretariat and the eyes and ears of the NCA. In this capacity it develops, manages all dimensions including, operational, planning, weapons development, arms control and disarmament affairs, command and control, storage, safety, security, budgets. The SPD functions directly under the President, the Prime Minister and the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. The SPD has its own intelligence network which adds to the checks and balances of the system other than taking input from the main intelligence organizations. It has a special directorate for training and for monitoring the activities, the psychological well being, and the political affiliations of all the staff that have anything to do with the nuclear assets. The Security Division is by far the most intricate operation with its tentacles firmly grounded into maintaining an air tight secure, accident safe environment.

 

Tier 3 which is the Strategic Force Command at each service (Army, Navy, Air) maintains a strict military chain of command and hierarchy over the handling and operation of the nuclear weapons. The services retain training, technical, and administrative control over their Strategic Forces. With a specialized team within the armed forces dedicated for nuclear assets, the security is even tighter.

 

It is important to comment on the misperceptions about Pakistan’s armed forces that they can be infiltrated by extremist forces. The armed forces are a nearly 1 million force to be reckoned with: 620,000 regulars and 302,000 FC/Rangers. With their rich traditions of Muslim and British history, their professionalism, education, international exposure, they are above provincialism, sectarianism and politics. The strict discipline (through court martialling if need be), constant monitoring and checks & balances ensure that extremist forces cannot manage any infiltration even remotely close to the nuclear assets.

 

Specifically on the monitoring activities of the nuclear related military personnel, the overwatch over the scientific community is very strict; with all visits and activities being tightly tracked. Retention of retiring staff for security and experience is another trend which works to their advantage. Daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, reviews and inspections add to the intelligence systems which monitor for security, safety in terms of accidents, and potential pilferage, theft or loss. In short the SPD’s Personnel and Human Reliability Programs ensure ‘cradle to grave’ management of their staff. The Sensitive Material Control & Accounting has been designed in such a way that it meets international best practices. Needless to say that transportation security and specialist vehicles for assets is equally well managed and monitored. In terms of the famous Two Man Rule and Permissive Action Links it is clear that Pakistan’s physical safety mechanisms and firewalls are well equipped to deal with unauthorized usage attempts. And whilst many have commented on physical security of the assets, it is worth noting that the physical security concept is based on the principles of multiple layers, ‘defence in depth’ and an inherent ability to detect and defeat both insider and outsider threat. Whether it is through the use of surveillance tactics like mobiles, foot patrolling, sniffer dogs, search lights, or cameras, the reserve quick reaction force forms an important barrier for the nuclear emergency support team.

 

Regulation is equally important and in terms of institutionalization there is an organization called the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority which overseas the safety of civilian nuclear facilities against radiation risks. The export of goods, technologies, material and equipment related to nuclear, biological weapons and their delivery systems, is well regulated under the Export Control Act of 2004. Since Pakistan unlike the developed countries does not have a nuclear industry in the private sector the controls are all within the public sector and as such not problematic at all.

 

What is interesting to note about the Pakistan nuclear assets management is not just their professional institutionalization but also the fact that this information has recently been shared with local and foreign intelligentsia. Needless to say that this is due to the heavy media attention that the subject has received. However, it is worth noting that such transparency of information sharing is lacking in other nuclear states.

 

Nuclear asset management is a national priority and the pride of all Pakistanis. Its integrity and safety is a subject that unites all of Pakistan’s 160 million population without an iota of doubt. This unity is unanimous across the different provinces, religious sects, political parties, and socio-economic groups. This is not a subject which divides. Our strength as a developing nation derives from many socio-economic, political empowerment and military power indicators. Whilst some indicators like economic, judicial, media, and natural resource management, are likely to arouse vibrant debate depending on the political affiliations of an individual, nuclear management is hopefully free from all divisive insinuations. The reason is simple – The implications of the allegations against our nuclear program’s safe management are not lost on any Pakistani who values our territorial and sovereign integrity beyond everything.

 

pioneer post – usa

Press Editor’s note: Marvi Memon, a member of Pakistan’s National Assembly, was among a group of women legislators from Pakistan who visited the Twin Cities last week.

By Marvi Memon

As I travel through the U.S. at the invitation of the U.S. State Department, I can’t help but notice that the word “Pakistan” has become synonymous with “terrorist base for al-Qaida.” To a moderate liberal member of parliament like me, this is a painful depiction of my country. Through dialogue with the people of the U.S., this misperception about Pakistan may perhaps be removed. But damage has been done, and we must recognize the realities on the ground. We have on the ground in Pakistan a war in progress. There is a huge irrelevant debate in Pakistan as to whose war it is. To me it’s clear that it’s a war being fought by moderates like me who are jealously guarding the moderate state concept of a Pakistan as given by our founding fathers. It’s a war being fought against foreign infiltrators from neighboring countries, foreign agents who are fueling the “Taliban” militant elements. It’s a war that we the moderates will definitely win. The U.S. is also fighting a war in the region. Its war is the war against terror. Our war is the war against the extremists in our country. We have some convergence of interests but the mechanics of the relationship are not mutually beneficial. The American administration feels Pakistan is not doing enough, and Pakistan feels that the American administration is attacking our sovereignty. I present to you some observations that will help make this relationship mutually beneficial. I do so for the sake of my children and yours, from one human to another. We all have the same basic needs as humans. We need to resolve our differences with dignity and tolerance so we can develop peacefully in the comity of nations. Pakistan is a nuclear state with a military completely capable of guarding its nukes. Anyone who tries to depict that the Taliban are close to taking over the nuclear assets is being unduly influenced by strategic propaganda against Pakistan. I urge you to trust me as a parliamentarian on this front; I have more to lose if the propaganda becomes a reality. Thus if I am confident that this is not a reality then that should be of some worth to you, my fellow humanitarians. The armed forces of Pakistan are not infiltrated by fundamentalists who are Taliban sympathizers. In our checkered political history, the armed forces is the one institution beyond reproach. It has checks and balances, and its current leadership, like its last one, is patriotic and mindful of its world responsibilities. The Taliban are a small group of militants combined with foreign agencies who are being dealt with by our armed forces. We the moderates are building a hearts-and-mind campaign for this military action. I would like to see the extremists zapped out wherever they are in Pakistan through firm military action. But for this campaign I need an end to the statements by the U.S. administration that glorify the strength and influence of these militants inside my country. The more U.S. officials describe Pakistan as a failed state, which it certainly is not, the more I and other moderates get pushed behind in our agenda to minimize the role of these militants. They are a handful. My armed forces are fully capable of dealing with them. And mind you, they are doing so with full determination. Pakistan is fighting on two fronts and will continue to do so until the U.S. administration deals with one of the fronts in its sphere of influence, namely India. Pakistan is confronted with a threat by extremists who have been infiltrated by Indian intelligence agents. U.S. administrations have been biased in their dealings with India and Pakistan for some time now. India has hundreds of armed separatist movements inside India, and the Indian government is indulging in state terrorism in many places, including Kashmir. But these human rights violations are glossed over because the Indian lobby is stronger than the Pakistani lobby. The U.S. administration must be forced by U.S. people to help resolve the Kashmir dispute — to mediate a settlement that is just to the Kashmiris. India must also be pushed into forward movement on the process of resolving other disputes with Pakistan, including water-related issues, which are a threat to Pakistan’s national security. The “Afpak” policy launched by the Obama administration assumes that Pakistan and Afghanistan are the only issue. It needs to see India as part of the problem, too, since it is launching terrorists into Pakistan. In our current war on extremism, we have a huge population moving away from the Taliban war zone into our cities to avoid becoming human shields for the Taliban. My country needs funds to help manage this displacement of 2 million people. We appreciate what the U.S has given so far, but we will need more from the entire international community — which the U.S. can help galvanize. Without assistance, this population of internally displaced people will never forgive Pakistani politicians or the U.S., which it holds responsible for its displacement. They will become easy fodder for the militants. These camps need to be models with adequate food, shelter, dignity and work opportunities. Idle, hungry, shelter-less minds can be influenced by Taliban propaganda. We cannot afford that. Our armed forces need better technology to fight the extremists, including drone technology. President Barack Obama calls for a new approach — for not breaking rules, because the U.S. is a land where laws are supreme; so I ask, how is breaking United Nations rules by attacking our sovereignty fair? Instead, give us the drone technology and we will zap the militants ourselves. That way, the U.S. administration will not be losing the hearts and minds campaign and will not be considered a policeman who breaks the rules. My country needs aid, but with dignity. The current Kerry-Lugar and Berman legislation in Congress offers $1.5 billion but with such conditions that I as a moderate patriotic Pakistani would rather forgo the aid. We will not hand over Dr. A.Q. Khan for interrogation to the U.S., as self-respecting patriots. He has been dealt with by my own government and is now no longer a threat. Secondly, I cannot have my aid linked to launching no terrorist attacks into India. This clause insinuates that Pakistan is involved with launching attacks into India, which it certainly is not. India is launching terrorist attacks inside my borders but that is ignored by the U.S. My country needs it to protect itself against extremists. But I would rather starve than compromise on my sovereignty. I hope the above gives you a sense of some of my concerns in the current relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan. I am convinced that I, as a younger generation of politicians, can be part of the fix-it team that can steer my nation toward being just, developed and moderate. But I need trust and dignity for my nation from you. We are all humans who wish to lead peaceful, dignified lives within our borders. We need to function as one team against the extremists. We cannot afford to have the militants steer our world toward injustice. We need to respect each other.

Marvi Memon, a member of the Pakistan Muslim League political party, was educated in Karachi and Paris and at the London School of Economics, from which she graduated with honors with a degree in international affairs. After a number of internships, she worked for Citibank Pakistan, and later launched a fleet-management company. Her Web site is www.marvimemon.com.

 

urdu english print media in pak

3 weeks in America – Part 1

By MNA Marvi Memon

www.marvimemon.com

 

 

“Will you be the US State Department’s guest for 3 weeks in the USA on a women’s parliamentary delegation?” This is the question that was put to me by US embassy staff. Three weeks was a long time to be away from political landscape but I accepted because I felt our voice was desperately needed in power corridors of Washington to represent Pakistan’s case; especially at this critical time when there was a military operation, an IDP situation and a congressional bill for $1.5 billion with controversial clauses.

 

I must admit that I was highly skeptical about this trip on the plane. There was none of the romance which I had felt when I boarded the flight for Beijing. However, I convinced myself that this was for Pakistan and I had to play my role in pushing Pakistan’s case internationally rather than just sitting in opposition benches and criticizing government.

 

We were part of the International Visitor Leadership Program. Margaret Thatcher had attended the same program many years back. On reaching DC we were given a political tourist tour. I could never have imagined how much symbolism there was in every monument that was being shown to us. It helped put the US success story in perspective. In Pakistan we spent so much time hating US, but not enough time learning what made them so powerful. My objective was two fold: to push Pakistan’s case and to learn the successful legislative processes that had made US so powerful so I could success transfer them into Pakistan. I was on a dry un-emotional mission!

 

Washington is a beautiful city but more importantly its symbolism as reflected in each monument, whether White House, Lincoln’s memorial, Jefferson’s memorial, the Congress was critical in understanding the idea behind all that was American. As I walked through Vietnam memorial I left a note which hoped that US need for memorials would reduce once sovereignty became as important as pushing democracy in the world.  

 

Our first business day in DC started with an introduction to the program by US State Department and co-host the Meridian Centre. I gave my wish list of all the meetings I required with Obama administration and Congress. The team was most accommodative and assured me that they would set them up. Interaction and dialogue is the only answer to deadlock and hatred. Thus meeting as many legislators was so important.

 

The lecture on American political system was equally useful for understanding the ABCs of American federal system, the concept of limited government and the concept of the individual. The US success story was based on a system of checks and balances but more importantly on the concept of a consistently executed and streamlined system!

 

Whichever system is chosen it needs to be followed without any short cuts. It needs to be an accountable system or else it becomes a despotic system; this rule is as true for a civil system as it is for a military political system. It was about choosing a well thought out system, not a system half-baked on individual self interest of coming to power. Systems took time to build. I was taking notes. I liked plenty but there was plenty which would have to be tailor made too since our political system, our culture and our environment was different. Infact at the end of the day, all human needs were similar despite the cultural differences. It was about zooming in on the similarities and resolving the differences.

 

Our meeting at the American University School of Public Affairs gave me an insight into how funding for political campaigns was executed in US, how women entered politics with difficulty here. I thought of how campaigns were funded at home and I didn’t want to think anymore! If our political campaign funding could have more accountability our corruption in politics would reduce.

 

Day 2 started with a trip to the Republican National Committee Headquarters to understand their system of primaries and campaigning. Next was a visit to Newsweek. Here I was eager to rattle off Pakistan’s issues with US foreign policy so that US intelligentsia could have our side of the story. I had prepared a detailed summary which I handed over on IDP assistance, drone attacks, Kashmir, Indian belligerence, Afghan transit trade, attacks on Pakistan’s nuclear credibility and our armed forces, Dr Afia, Afpak policy and the Kerry Lugar/ Berman legislation. This interaction was so critical. Dialoguing, giving our side of the coin to all those who made or broke hearts of minds and changed history pages on a daily pages.

 

We then proceeded to a meeting with Pakistan-American Leadership Council. This was our front running team in US which could lobby Pakistan’s case better since they had financial funding leverage over the Congressmen. Obviously nothing like the Indian lobby, but I was determined to build bridges with them and feed them direct news from Islamabad so that they could push our case better in US.

 

Finally it was time to meet the Congresswomen Sheila Jackson-Lee the leader of the Pakistani caucus. Here was a chance to tell her all the issues I had explained to Newsweek and especially our issues with the controversial clauses in the Berman legislation. I gave my hit list of issues I had with the US foreign policy in such a way that the congresswoman acknowledged the bluntness as being productive for forward movement.  I had taken firm stand on our real sovereignty issues and I was satisfied that I had represented Pakistan well.

 

We had tea with the Ambassador to Pakistan and then dinner with the Pakistani lobby team. It was important to be on the same page and rise above party affiliations at this stage for Pakistan which we did. We discussed over dinner how Indians were better cemented in their lobby tactics and I made a strategy to improve our lobby initiatives within US through such teams. This to me is such an exciting process. Working with teams to make the mission happen. No mission can happen in isolation. The webs of support have to be built in.

 

Next day for me started with a very productive interaction on Pakistan national security concerns at US TV channel C-Span. I raised the same issues as I had at Newsweek. In the process I missed a meeting with Ambassador at large for global women’s issues. But this one interaction with C-span helped with building our case in US . The emails I have received from real Americans since, prove that effective dialoguing can reduce perception gaps.

 

I rushed next to the Congress and had the opportunity to meet Congressman Berman, and many others before they entered the Congressional hearing on the Pakistan aid legislation. I briefly described my reservations on the clauses which would give them access to Dr AQ, and the one that linked aid to not sending terrorists to India. I said there were a ‘no go’ clauses with many offensive connotations. I found the Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee Mr Berman forthcoming. He insisted that as long as we were not proliferating these clauses should not be seen as offensive. I stuck to my guns. But the power of the dialogue process was what I appreciated. I had done my job but we had much more lobbying to be done. I am sure government had tried but so far we had not won.

 

As I sat there listening to the hearing, the rest of my colleagues joined in. We were recognized with an applause as per parliamentary traditions. I couldn’t stay till the end of the proceedings since we had a flight to catch but I understand from media reports that my observations had made some impact. It was a long battle. We had lost so much time since we had not pursued a joint strategy as government and opposition. We had spent so much time in our in-fights. I was excited because I saw a challenge and perhaps for the first time I understood the mechanics of the fix it. Without knowing how the US system worked it was impossible to fix. And frankly it was so counter productive to sit and rage away anti American slogans in parliament. True leadership took action fixing what they didn’t like. They didn’t waste time screaming about it. I was part of the fix it team.  

 

Later in the day we left for Minneapolis for our next set of meetings. All I can say is that there was some progress on the controversial clauses in the bill as the day progressed in the hearing in Congress. I intend doing my bit when I return to DC in June after our round trip of Minnesota, Texas and North Carolina. I will write to you from each of these stops. It’s all about helping Pakistan internationally. We all need to do our bit. My last flight into DC was skeptic. My flight out of DC was hopeful that I could contribute to fixing what I didn’t like in this relationship.

 

 

article for urdu print

Gilgit-Baltistan delegation visits PM

 

On May 14, in my capacity as PML incharge Gilgit-Baltistan I led a delegation of  Gilgit-Baltistan to visit Prime Minister Gillani so that we could apprise him of the issues of the area which despite one year of PPP government had not been resolved. They had not been resolved because of the colonial afsarshai minsdset of the bureaucracy and because of the complete disinterest of the KANA Minister. I am grateful to the PM that he listened to all our issues for the region and gave good directives to resolve them. I would like to share them with you because I feel the issues of Gilgit-Baltistan dont make it through to you via media. I share them with you so that you can be better connected with the people of Gilgit Baltistan. The more you are connected the better nation we will build, the better the provincial harmony will be. Big provinces being connected to small provinces is crucial for nation building. I hope by highlighting the struggle of the people of GB media will understand what a huge service they are doing to nation building and bringing people closer.

 

It was my first time in the PM house after our government had left. My team of Speaker, 5 Ministers from GB, 3 MNAs were with me. I felt good that I had taken them all so that their issues could be heard in detail in this important PM House. It was a pleasure to see a PM who was humble, not arrogant, who gave elected representatives the ear for their issues. The issues and resolutions discussed were as follows:

 

 The name Northern Areas needs to be changed to Gilgit-Baltistan as per the wishes / resolution of NALA (provincial assembly of GB) The PM accepted this and asked for this issue to be taken up in the Cabinet Committee meeting. If the people wanted name change who were we to bloc it. I was irritated that 6 months of delays by bureaucracy had been seen on this symbolic gesture.

 

The PIA flights were asked to be increased  from 2 to 3 a day. PM accepted and asked for PIA Chairman to implement. This was a demand whose acceptance meant the facilitation of millions travelling from GB to Islamabad for work, health and education. Imagine the facilitation it would cause.

 

Basha-Diamir Dam apprehensions were discussed. Now let it be very clear that i personally am pro Basha because its Pakistan’s need. My people in Thatta  and GB are not pro basha because they feel they would suffer most. Thus as a true representative of my people, Its my responsibility to build consensus on this issue. Not to get them sold out for the sake of the federation. And to ensure that their concerns are addressed. Also to have the stomach to pursue correct decisions which at the time might not be popular. To make them popular by ensuring my people of GB and Thatta get benefits from this project. This was the most difficult item on the agenda- I cared about the federation and yet my people came first too. I would have to play the bridge to ensure they all won.

 

PM was informed that the people wished for the name to be Diamir only not Basha. Compensation for those who would loose their homes as a result of dam was demanded at international levels. PM was informed that both power houses were in Diamir side and not in NWFP thus royalty was to be given to GB. This was the biggest injustice a bigger province was doing with a smaller province. PM accepted that these were issues which needed resolution and that a committee would discuss these and resolve to the satisfaction of NALA. He put me in committee. I said I wanted the elected representatives from this region in the committee not just me. I recommended Speaker NALA and a provincial minister.
PM was informed that October 2007 package approved by President Musharraf was not implemented. It was a package that meant more devolution of powers for the region. It was important and yet bureaucracy had scuttled it not politicians. I managed to get an important decision that whatever new package PM would introduce it would have the approval of NALA (assembly) and the KANA Committee. Yes the approval so that the elected representatives would be part of decision making not just a victim of bureaucracy giving them a package not good enough for them. Frankly if they made a combination of PML and PPP package that would be best for the people. But approval from NALA was critical.

 

Financial matters were discussed. Approval of giving finds to GB in one bloc was given. PM asked them to look into this matter. This was their need. GB account in State Bank was demanded. Imagine all other provinces including AJK had it but GB didnt. PM accepted. The release of 50% of Rs 5.45 bn which was approved but which had been blocked earlier. The development funds not being spent was something painful and I am glad we got good decision on its release. This government could never match the billions President Musharraf had given for this region. No wonder the people of teh area loved President Musharraf.

 

 Satpara redesign PC1 needed to be followed. Gilgit Skurdu road which had stopped had to be implemented. PC4 for all completed projects needed to be approved for staffing. PM approved all of these requests.

 

Wetland project ownership was demanded for GB since GB had 33 wetlands versus NWFP which had 3. Imagine how unfair it was. This would be discussed at inter provincial meeting. Working plan for forests in Diamir was to be made functional. PM was sympathetic.

 

And now onto some political bribery issues that we highlighted. PM took strict notice of the 36,000 BBISP forms which had been given wrongly to non elect members and to party members of PPP which was tantamount to pre poll rigging. We demanded these forms needed to be blocked and the same amount to be given to elected representatives since this was the practice followed in the rest of the country. These forms had become a money making business. They were being sold for Rs 200-Rs 1000 a piece!

 

Media share of advertisement was demanded for media and press club grants. PM also took strict notice of why Supreme Appellate Court was not appointed for 6 months and subordinate judiciary upgradation case with KANA was pending at KANA Ministry for 2 years.

 

On murder of Deputy Speaker, we had already managed to get government to initiate a judicial inquiry. Now it was time for action on that results. PM agreed to take those officials in the administration to task who had failed, at conclusion of judicial report. Extension of posts was to be discouraged in the future. PM gave approval in principle to this. This would set the right trend. That if law and order was not maintained those responsible for maintaining it would be held accountable.

 

And now finally the biggest issue: the people of GB had no legal status within Pakistan. The Constitutional Rights issue was discussed and it was decided that AJK style government was to be given preference at the time of Package since that was a demand of NALA thus the people.

 

Lastly the PM accepted the invitation of the PML members to visit Gilgit-Baltistan at the earliest.

 

I am satisfied that I had done my job as PML Incharge GB. I was a proud opposition MNA who was being constructive not destructive. I had raised issues and got good directives from PM on burning issues. Now it was the next phase, to ensure implementation despite bureaucracy trying to bloc devolution. The standing committee of the National Assembly on KANA would ensure implementation and I was on it too.

 

It was a jihad for the people.  I have become a part of the struggle of the people of GB most interestingly because of the love my father Senator Nisar Memon had for these people when he was in charge PML. The delegation after visiting the PM called on my father. They must have said something because when I reached home I could see a lot of pride in my father’s eyes. That made my day. I was helping these people not for a vested reason. I would never ask for votes for myself from this region. This was not my constituency. I would never get elected as MNA from here. I had vowed to only give to these people not take. The only thing i accepted in return were the duas from the people. This was so important. It is the biggest payback for a politician. I am grateful for the love I get from the people of GB. I will always try and live up to their expectations. They are my people because they are Pakistanis. And we must rise to Pakistaniyat and serve the downtrodden.

 

May 13 – 5am (Nwaqt article too )

 

 

 

Press Release

IRI presents poll results to PML.

 

May 12, Islamabad: PML MNA Marvi Memon stated that the IRI Index, Pakistan Public Opinion Survey presented to her party was “an eye opener of deteriorating government indicators”.  She stated that it was regretted that the March 2009 survey results were being presented to political parties in May 2009. This delay led to unnecessary suspicions. Whilst expressing her satisfaction on overall survey methodology and demographic sampling she said that “Survey results affect perceptions of educated masses. The IRI Jan 2008 survey results had unfairly affected PMLQ popularity for Feb 18 results.”

 

Commenting on the poll results for March 2009 on PPP led coalition government she stated that people’s trust in PPP had reduced significantly considering that 81% people considered Pakistan was heading in wrong direction. 85% gave government favourable rating in June 2008 whilst in March 2009 this favourable rating had fallen to 29%. Also 79% felt government had performed poorly on issues most important to them. The government had miserably failed to come upto the economic expectations of the people as well since 63% people felt that their personal economic situation had worsened.

 

Mr Zardari’s ratings to face problems effectively were at 9% which was a disaster. Infact his ratings were 7% worse than President Musharraf’s ratings were at the time of the last PML government.  Whilst Zardari’s ratings for those who disliked him were at 72% and the worst out of all political leaders.

 

She expressed her concern that 74% people felt religious extremism was a serious problem and that 69% felt that ALQ/Taliban operating in Pakistan was a serious problem. She stated that “despite these perceptions the government had done little to spread policies of religious harmonization.” Moreover she expressed her dismay at the favourable ratng of 43% of Lashkar-e-Taiba. She stated that this showed the government had done little to present LeT as a terrorist organization to the people. Equally upsetting were the increase from 36% in June 2008 to 64% in March 2009, the rating of those who wished to see a religious right coalition government in power. This she claimed did not bode well for the moderate liberal Pakistan that Quaid had left.

 

On the issue of the army fighting extremists in NWFP and FATA only 45% people agreed to this option. Thus she stated that when government made claims that 180 million Pakistanis were with them in War against terror it was like living in fools paradise. It was an important reality check on how government needed to build the people’s support for the military operation before militants built their support, even if parliamentary forces had given their blessings to military operation. Only then would the war against extremism truly win.

 

She stated that it was alarming that the 73% respondents felt that Talibans would be stronger as a result of the peace deal versus federal government being stronger rating at 67%. It showed that the people of Pakistan had little faith in government’s ability to negotiate.

 

Interestingly she noted that the army’s ratings during June 2008 to March 2009 had increased from 60% to 80% which was reflected of the better perceptions about them. Whilst the people accepting army takeovers in emergency only had increased from 56% in October 2008 to 65% in march 2009.

 

On institutional ratings she stated that National Assembly’s falling rating from 81% in June 2008 to 72% in March 2009 should be an awakening for all of us but most specifically for government which claimed that as a democratic government it had promoted parliamentary supremacy.

 

Social justice and Pakistaniyat

 

 

Imagine your early memories of social justice and Pakistaniyat. A land where migrants were welcomed from India. A land where hospitality was a norm in every household however rich or poor. A land where your neighbour couldn’t go to sleep on an empty stomach if you didn’t. A land where there was a social system which provided that safety net of social security. A land which had higher moral standards in its judicial dispensation, its work ethics, its social interactions. A land where meritocracy was the norm.

 

An impartial analysis will prove that we have transgressed to the bottom of this social justice ladder in 60 years. We need to question ourselves whether the type of social justice that was practiced in our grandparents homes, do we indulge in the same or have we transgressed. At individual levels we have transgressed and this is reflected on how the state has transgressed too. Let us remind ourselves of the state’s responsibilities as per the constitution:

 

Chapter 2 Article. 37. Promotion of social justice and eradication of social evils. 

The State shall:

(a) promote, with special care, the educational and economic interests of backward classes or areas;

(b) remove illiteracy and provide free and compulsory secondary education within minimum possible period;

(c) make technical and professional education generally available and higher education equally accessible to all on the basis of merit;

(d) ensure inexpensive and expeditious justice;

(e) make provision for securing just and humane conditions of work, ensuring that children and women are not employed in vocations unsuited to their age or sex, and for maternity benefits for women in employment;

 (f) enable the people of different areas, through education, training, agricultural and industrial development and other methods, to participate fully in all forms of national activities, including employment in the service of Pakistan;

(g) prevent prostitution, gambling and taking of injurious drugs, printing, publication, circulation and display of obscene literature and advertisements;

(h) prevent the consumption of alcoholic liquor otherwise than for medicinal and, in the case of non-Muslims, religious purposes; and

(i) decentralise the Government administration so as to facilitate expeditious disposal of its business to meet the convenience and requirements of the public. 

 

Islam also is fairly clear on social justice:

Quran says: “Men, we have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another. The noblest of you in Allah’s sight is the most righteous of you. Allah is wise and all knowing” (49:13).

Prophet Muhammad (saw) says: ” ‘O people, listen carefully, your Lord is one Lord, there is no doubt about it. Your ancestor, is one ancestor, there is no doubt about it. Listen well to my words: no Arab has any superiority over a non–Arab, and no non—Arab is superior to an Arab. No black is superior to a brown or red, and no red superior to any black. If there is any superiority in anyone it is due to his God–fearing qualities. Have I conveyed the message?

 

The standard definition of what is social justice…

*Social justice, sometimes called civil justice, refers to the concept of a society in which justice is achieved in every aspect of society, rather than merely the administration of law. It is generally thought of as a world which affords individuals and groups fair treatment and an impartial share of the benefits of society.

* It can also refer to the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within a society

 

Needless to say achieving social justice in the light of Islam or the constitution is a huge challenge for any government. There are many aspects to social justice. I will for the purpose of this discourse only concentrate on two . I would like to turn to the current challenges of Pakistan and suggest some immediate solutions to re-achieving our social justice and our Pakistaniyat on simply two challenges.

Firstly the IDP (internally displaced person) challenge as a result of the operations against the militants in the North. We need to galvanize support for their protection, livelihood and rehabilitation. The nation came together at the time of the earthquake and we need to do the same this time. They need to be provided adequate food shelter livelihood immediately. State needs to be aided by civil society and political forces without any political considerations. We need to ask for writ of state to be established in all areas of Pakistan and for extremism to be defeated. There will be either moderate liberals or non liberals in this war against extremism. We need to take our positions and not shy back from doing so even if certain political forces indulge in double speak.  

 

The second challenge is to make some dents in the extremist forward march by helping to provide employment opportunities to madrassah graduates. Firstly there is no clarity on the number of madrassahs in the country. An immediate registration drive is required. The last official count in 2002 was 13000. It is now estimated at 40000. If the number of students then were 2 million this must be at 8 million now. An immediate database is required. And then a matching of skills to jobs is required. A ministry is required especially on this. And trust me it will be a worthwhile exercise. Any effort geared towards mainstreaming madrassah students and finding them employment opportunities other than jihad against state will aid extremism reduction in society.

 

For this effort multinationals need to put their corporate social responsibility programs forward, local businesses need to do the same. And they need to simply adopt a madrassah. They need to give vocational training related to their field and then employ these youth.

 

This is a beginning. I would now like to throw the debate open to all of you to give more solutions on the same.

 

Tolerance and Pakistaniyat – Part 1

Tolerance and Pakistaniyat – Part 1

Ones basic teachings in Islam are mostly from what one has learnt from
home. When I think of my learnings on Islam I zoom back to my
dadi’s days and I think of what she taught me. I then zoom into what I
learnt from my parents. Next I zoom into what I learnt from my
religious teachers at St Joseph Convent High School and what I learnt
from my maulvi sahib. And finally I zoom
into what I have learnt from my own readings and investigations on
Islam as an adult Muslim woman. And the one aspect which is a common
thread through all is what Islam has to say on tolerance. And this is
what Pakistan needs so desperately right now.

As a young Pakistani I never had a concept of the different firqas in
Islam. I was told I was a Muslim and that was it. It was only when I
grew up and saw ground realities in the streets that I realized that
there were many schools of law within Islam. I have never quite come
to terms with the concept of firqas. For me I like a simplistic pure
version of Islam – Quran and Sunnah. One that believes there is wealth
and no division in diversity. Now that these 73 firqas exist we need
to cohabitate peacefully with them.

Did firqas exist at Prophet’s (PBUH) time? No they didn’t. We need to
return to that basic Islam which the Prophet gave us. We for most of
us have been born within Islam. But have we thought of that pure Islam
that we need to practice and preach and pass on? It will not be easy
since we have many different ways of looking at the same things. Many
people will tell us the right versus the wrong way. there is no right
or wrong. there is just different.

I believe that we need to urgently look at our 73 different firqas and
find common threads so we can bring people together and not allow them
to be driven further apart. One that says, don’t get lost in creating
different means of understanding the same Quran and Sunnah. One that
says that when my son grows up I don’t want him to say ‘I am Shia or
Sunni’, or that I am ‘Hanafi or Brehvi’, I want him to simply say ‘I
am Muslim and most tolerant of non-Muslims’ and that I live in a
Pakistan where my neighbours feel the same way.’ It is important to me
as a politician that that’s the kind of Pakistaniyat I spread. Perhaps
this is why I am forever obsessed with taking up issues of
discrimination against the minorities and smaller sects on the floor
of the assembly.

For Pakistan’s healing process where we have divided ourselves between
sects and ethnicities its time for some soul searching. Its time for
some commonalities. Its time to zoom in on our similarities rather
than differences. This is how I define a moderate Islamic culture.
Full of tolerance.

Only then can we clear the extremist threat and build on Pakistaniyat.
Both of which are critical ingredients for Pakistan’s growth. Our
mosques and madrassahs need to be bastions of commonalities, of what
we all share in Islam, not a religious breeding ground for passing
judgments against different sects, political leaderships, or
ethnicities.

We need to create consensus in society. We often talk about creating
consensus in politics. How is consensus amongst political
representatives possible if we don’t create consensus in society
first? The religious-social fabric of society in Pakistan is partially
built by the maulvi teaching a child Quran and Islam’s teachings. It
is also shaped by Friday khutbas in mosques. And thus what we hear at
these important moments as children or adults, if it is tolerant, we
will create a tolerant society. If it is intolerant, we will create an
intolerant society.

Since as a woman I have only heard of the quality of some Friday
khutbas given by ‘learned’ maulvis and hardly ever had the ‘pleasure’
of listening to the same, I can only hope that our khutbas in mosques
are free of divisive tactics. I assume that in a society striving to
create consensus and tolerance an important place to start would be
ensuring that the khutbas are tolerant and thus close to the spirit of
real Islam.

The subjects being addressed in these khutbas need to discuss
similarities, consensus building subjects, and most urgently
Pakistaniyat. They certainly need monitoring by the Council of Islamic
Ideology if they are not following these objectives. I have always
liked the idea of state taking responsibility of writing khutbas and
ensuring standardized versions are delivered every Friday in mosques
everywhere in Pakistan. These standardized versions need to
incorporate the different schools of law. They need to create a
balanced tolerant menu. Since we have no choice about the 73 firqas
that already exist, the least we can do is find a common thread
between them all and preach that common pure Islam in Friday khutbas.

I believe that some real alims of the state need to write the content
and subject of what is preached at khutbas rather than the non alims.
Certified maulvis need to preach at khutbas. They can be certified in
the same way as madrassah syllabus is approved by a common board.
After all khutbas are guiding
innocent minds, and since we have left that responsibility to mostly
non alims we are ending up with an intolerant non alim society!

For me my Islam is extremely tolerant. It is tolerant of differences,
tolerant of those who are not so perfect, tolerant and thus inclusive
rather than exclusive. It is often said that religious tolerance is
the highest evidence of culture in a nation. I am no big religious
expert. And those of you who are would know better than me how big
Islam is on tolerance.

I would only like to quote a few examples from  Islamic history to
show the same. It is clear firstly that there is no compulsion in
religion. Thus religion cannot be forced down someone through the gun.
Men choose their path – allegiance or opposition – and it is
sufficient punishment for those who oppose that they draw further and
further away from the light of truth.

If we want to understand how Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) preached
tolerance, we need to look at the Charter which he granted to the
Christians monks at Sinai  He gave to the Jews of Medina, so long as
they were faithful to him, precisely the same treatment as to the
Muslims. He never was aggressive against any man or class of men; he
never penalized any man, or made war on any people, on the ground of
belief but only on the ground of conduct.

When Islam has so much tolerance towards other religions how could it
not have expected the same amongst Muslims. It is one function of
Islamic law to protect the privileged status of minorities, and this
is why non-Muslim places of worship have flourished all over the
Islamic world. Islamic law also permits non-Muslim minorities to set
up their own courts to implement family laws drawn up by the
minorities themselves and to govern their own affairs.  And yet we in
Pakistan have no tolerance for minorities. To me my Islam and my
Pakistan and thus Pakistaniyat is all about tolerance for those who
are different.  It is about creating similarities amongst those who
are different.

History provides many examples of Muslim tolerance towards other
faiths. When the great leader and second Caliph, Umar, entered
Jerusalem in the year 634, Islam guaranteed freedom of worship to all
religious communities in the city. In fact, so careful was Umar in
setting an example for his people that he not only went to a church to
pray, he prayed outside in the courtyard, lest his followers after his
death be tempted to convert the church into a mosque.

Once a man came upon the Prophet (peace be upon him) with his sword
raised, ready to strike. He sneered: “Who can stop me from killing you
now, Muhammad?” Then the sword fell from his hand.  The Prophet (peace
be upon him) picked up the sword, and said: “And now, who can stop
me?” However, he did not harm the man. Instead, he then took the man
to his Companions and had him swear a covenant neither to fight
against the Prophet nor join with those who fight against him. The
clemency and tolerance exhibited by the Prophet (peace be upon him)
won the man’s heart.

The point I am trying to make is that when we know Islam is tolerant,
when we know Pakistaniyat was formed on the basis of Islam, we must
ensure tolerance is preached in our society. We must start from the
khutbas. I call upon the government to look into monitoring the hatred
being preached through these khutbas. I call upon the Council of
Islamic Ideology for setting up a system for khutba content to be
cleansed of hatred and divisiveness. I call upon government to start
certifying maulvis to preach khutbas.

If we as politicians will be scared of discussing religion the Soofis
will try and take charge of our religion. That we must not allow,
because what they preach is not
tolerant and thus cannot be Islam. My Pakistaniyat commands me to
identify the intolerances in my society and to develop ways of
cleaning them up. If Khutbas are one place where we witness
intolerance for difference, they are not the only place. They are a
starting point. We must find all those intolerant points in our
society and we need to fix all them. Only then can we create an
extremist free society. To start with lets fix the khutbas.