Pak Tea House » human rights, Pakistan » State of Human Rights in Pakistan
State of Human Rights in Pakistan
Three years into its term of office, the government faces unprecedented criticism. Given complaints about the elected government’s performance, do you think Pakistan was more stable and better governed under Musharraf?
ADH: The past three years have shown us that even a dysfunctional, transitional democracy is preferable to military rule and dictatorship. The government’s legitimacy stems from the constitution and hence it has been bound to uphold the rule of law – even in areas where it may not have suited the interests of the ruling party. Musharraf, in contrast, held power through the barrel of a gun and the difference is quite apparent. Of course, elected institutions need to improve their governance capacity and skills, but we must remain cognizant of the fact that the elected government’s authority remains notional in several areas – particularly those concerning the military and its intelligence agencies. In other areas, for example, the judiciary, the executive has had to cede authority to the appropriate institution even if it does not suit its interests. It is a function of democracy and the pressures of pluralism that Zardari restored Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to office and has cohabited with him for two years now and accepted the independent status of the judiciary. Just this one development marks a significant shift from the structural authoritarianism that is used to govern Pakistan traditionally which vests all power in the executive. I think we should give the government credit for this. That said, there remain serious issues of military impunity and civilian misgovernance that need to be urgently addressed.
What would say about the rollback of rights friendly legislation such as the Women’s Protection Act and judicial persecution of politicians such as Sherry Rehman who have sought to defend human rights?
I would not say that judicial independence has led to this rollback but the conduct of this institution like any other requires improvement that can only come through meaningful reform. Of course, there are certain judicial decisions that are quite simply deplorable. The Federal Shariat Court verdict on the Women’s Protection Act is one such instance as is the conduct of the Lahore High Court with reference to the Aasia Bibi case and its decision to allow frivolous litigation against Sherry Rehman. Similarly, lower-level judicial support to charge Sherry Rehman under 295 C in Multan amounts to legal persecution. Rehman is a democrat and a symbol of the very best in politics. It is Pakistan’s good fortune that principled and brave politicians such as her are willing to risk their lives to say and do the right thing. The judiciary should be ordering her protection rather than allowing challenges to her right to table legislation and enabling her criminalization under laws that she is seeking to reform. Judicial inaction and culpability have already contributed to ongoing persecution of minorities and the deaths of Salman Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti. After all this, to be complicit in Sherry Rehman’s harassment reflects abominably on those who are doing so.
Can you clarify what you mean by military impunity? Is it not the government’s job to hold the military accountable?
Of course it is but as of now this has not happened. Such a shift in the institutional balance of power has yet to occur. The fact is that the terms of the transition include “political cover” to the war against the Taliban. The military appears to have made clear to the government that this includes attempted political cover up of its counter-terrorism operations whether in FATA, Swat or in Balochistan. Countless terrorism suspects remain under military detention in Swat. The government gets blamed fordrone strikes by the United States when these strikes are accompanied by persistent claims of large numbers of civilian casualties. But it is the security agencies that withhold access to the conflict areas which prevents independent verification andrefuse to admit that they are not only party to the drone strikes but provide ground intelligence to enable them. And then there is Balochistan where the security establishment continues to perpetrate abuses such as disappearances, torture and kilings. Here the government can be blamed for being complicit in these abuses by changing its 2008 position when it apologized to the Baloch to its position today.
But if the security agencies are to be blamed for many of these abuses why do the media persistently target the government?
Pakistan’s media needs to use its independence responsibly. Unfortunately this is not happening. It targets the government because it does not fear the former. It does not hold the military to account because it is frightened of their power. HRW is of the view that the greatest threat to media freedom emanates today not from the elected government which has shown respect and tolerance as it should for the media. Rather, it stems from the intelligence agencies, non-state actors such as the Taliban and, finally, from the judiciary which has exploited over-broad contempt laws to stifle criticism of the institution.
What can the government do to improve the human rights situation?
Immediately, the government can and should engage in substantive police reform. It also needs to ensure greater transparency in governance by creating non-partisan oversight mechanisms over the length and breadth of government. Corruption cannot be tackled just through a non-partisan anti-corruption body though that is important but rather through transparency at all transactional levels. It needs to shed its policy of appeasing extremism and needs to develop the political will to hold the military and its intelligence agencies to account, all difficulties and risks inherent to the exercise notwithstanding.
First published in The Friday Times, Lahore on April 1, 2011
Filed under: human rights, Pakistan · Tags: agencies, government, human rights, Pakistan
14 Responses to "State of Human Rights in Pakistan"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- AKB
said How utterly amazing is someone who flees from some... - AKB said UGLY INDIA!!
.
India’s slide leads to an i...
- JB
said Here is the reality and the sooner Pakistanis and... - AKB said DAMN THESE LIBERAL MULLAHS!!
.
Dharun Ravi Sen...
- AKB said @ ahem
I have never seen a bigger idiot than y...
- RajTOO
said Tajender,
you copy and paste machine, do you even... - tajender
said rajtoo like anyother brhmnst u have nothing except... - RajTOO said Tajender is a pure Paki. Just because he copies an...
- ahem
said to rex
Monotheism is inherently totalitarian an... - ahem said tajender reveals himself as a tamilian muslim....
[...] State of Human Rights in Pakistan [...]
The media is run by businessmen – not by journalists and entertainers. Businessmen will bow to every whim of the government. Geo TV blowing its own horn about not be able show Geo Super. None of the other TV channels have been sympathetic. Since newspapers owners and TV channel owners are one and the same – so they are the least concerned about Geo. Just as Geo owners who are also the owners of ‘The News’ newspaper – do not care about their rivals.
The fact that PEMRA exists shows that the government which calls itself democratic – likes to control and dominate the media. PEMRA should not exist.The media should be absolutely and completely independent of government control. Controlling information has not work and will never work. So the government should stop doing that. The policies of the establishment should never intrude in the functioning of the media in any way. This may sound idealistic – but that is how it should be. A media controlled by the government is not freed and will never ever be free.
This statement by Ali Dayan Hasan is a fairly worthless bit of breathy moral posturing. What good is a ‘transitional democracy’ which cannot even prosecute terrorists or assassins properly? Which cannot protect its citizens, its provincial governors – let alone its minority citizens? The military is not
‘called to account’? Well then, who is? This article is a waste of good blog space, full of ‘ought’s and ‘should’s and moral finger pointing. Get a life,
Ali Dayan, try living in the real world, not the PC world of easy judgments and silly moral prescriptions. What a load of self-righteous blather!
@Jay Wilson: Totally agreed, hit the nail on the head! Anyways the author himself makes extremely foolish statements!
The heroic age of antiquity lives in dreams like sand castles built on the beach to be reconstructed every afternoon. It is a worthwhile activity of love, passion and hope. Fokoyama talks about end of history but in fact he should have talked about start of a new history.
I love you very much,
very, very much you know,
it is a chain by now,
that heats the blood inside the veins,
you know………….
I miss you my brother
The real problem in Pakistan is this fixation on a 7th century arab ideology which supposedly solves all problems with the help of the supposedly one and only god (captured in an old book of many subtle and gross manipulations). The society has become so sick with this self-deceit and related angry fascism (needed to protect this self-deceit) that no improvement of any sort or level is possible in Pakistan so long this ideology and its arrogance lord over their minds. To make matters worse they are enthusiastic about exporting this brand and think that this so-called god will assure them a place in heaven for this.
Pakistan exemplifies how perverse human mind can become, especially through monotheism and a conceited religion based thereupon. The concept of human rights is actually incompatible with such a faith.
BTW: the muslim woman, especially the veiled one, is (voluntarily or involuntarily) a big helper/instrument in keeping up and strengthening the fascism that is inherent in this 7th century arab religion.
“This statement by Ali Dayan Hasan is a fairly worthless bit of breathy moral posturing. What good is a ‘transitional democracy’ which cannot even prosecute terrorists or assassins properly? ……..
…………………… What a load of self-righteous blather!”
@J.Wilson:
That was scathing.
What do you suggest should replace the ‘transitional democracy’?
How likely do you think it will happen?
to mythbuster
All forms of government will fail if honesty is not promoted. An ideology that compels its victims to practise flattery (of god or his so-called messenger or book) day-in and day-out will never succeed in bringing about a good healthy society. Flattery (even of some god) is completely opposed to honesty.
As regards elections they must be held every year or every six months (modern technology does make it possible) and not once in 4 or 5 or 6 years. The ministries must be distributed among all parties in the parliament and not just in the hands of the so-called ruling party. The concept of a “ruling party” (or ruling ideology or religion) is mischievous, even fascistic.
Reuters, yesterday:
China Tells US to quit as human rights judge.
“The United States is beset by violence, racism and torture and has no authority to condemn other governments’ human rights problems, China said on Sunday, countering U.S. criticism of Beijing’s crackdown. . . . “The United States ignores its own severe human rights problems, ardently promoting its so-called ‘human rights diplomacy’, treating human rights as a political tool to vilify other countries and to advance its own strategic interests,” said a passage from the Chinese report.”
China also “accused the U.S. . . . of pushing for Internet freedom around the world as a way to undermine other nations, while noting that Washington’s campaign against secret-spilling website WikiLeaks showed its own sensitivity to the free flow of information,” and further “lambasted the U.S. over issues ranging from homelessness and violent crime to the influence of money on politics and the negative effects of its foreign policy on civilians.” China’s human rights record is atrocious, but can anyone contest the validity of its objections to the U.S. and the Obama administration’s purporting to act as human rights arbiters for the world?
to rehmat
China should be thankful to the USA for exposing and criticising the human rights situation in China in spite of the fact that USA is imperfect.
If we insist that a critic has to be a perfect error-less human being then no criticism will be possible and we will all be the losers.
If someone criticizes you then thank him, take him seriously – don’t go about finding his faults at that very juncture. First take his criticism seriously, implement it, thank him and then criticize him in turn (in order to help him out of his own defects).
China is known to be a rogue totalitarian, ethnofascist, 1984-type state – far more roguish than USA.
[...] Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Human Rights Commission of Pakistan State of Human Rights in Pakistan | Pak Tea House 2009 Human Rights Report: Pakistan National Commission for Human Rights Act, 2008 [...]
I love you my brother but it is time we must separate. Two; as individuals. We are individuals and I will always love you as such. I want you in my life but as one of two, not one of one.
Human Rights, no matter where must always be respected.
Yes, the love if it is good will always heat the blood.
If you love something and you let it go, if it loves you, it will come back to you.
Plz do act on this human and student voilation
very nice