[sacw] sacw dispatch #2 (17 Nov.99)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #2
17 November 1999
________________
#1. Can the Pakistan Military Deliver ?
#2. Social Workers Thrashed
#3. Upcoming Film Screening in Delhi
#4. Indian Army court summons journalists=8A
________________
#1.
CAN THE MILITARY DELIVER?
By Dr. Asad Sayeed

Mir ke Bais-e- Azaar huai Jis Ke Sabab
Ussi Attar ke Londe Se Dawa Laite Hain
(Mir Taqi Mir)

That once again a democratically elected government has been overthrown at
gun-point has caused no grief to the people at large. From newspaper
columns to drawing room discussions and the lay person on the street,
everyone appears to condone the military coup. Even those who never tired
of potificating about the rule of law, did not raise an eye-brow when the
coup maker had the audacity to call the ultimate umbrella law of the land -
the Constitution - a limb of the nation, dispensable enough to be
amputated.

The argument goes that there was no democracy under a democratic
dispensation and the constitution was amended and violated with impunity
anyway. Implicitly most Pakistanis have demonstrated their preference to be
ruled by those possessing the greatest means of violence over a chaotic,
mismanaged and corrupt democratic dispensation. For all the criticisms of
Nawaz Sharif becoming autocratic, there is preference for the ultimate
autocrat. Some logic!

In short, all arguments for preferring a bad democracy to military rule are
considered abstract clap trap. What is required - we are told - is good
governance and delivery on certain key issues that afflict state and
society. The presumed sincerity of the coup maker and the coterie of
'clean' and 'competent' men and women he has gathered around him is reason
enough to expect the moon.

But should we expect this dispensation to deliver? First we have to
remember that from the information emanating from Rawalpindi, the coup
makers are only interested in maintaining the status quo. Continuation of a
disastrous foreign policy, toeing the IMF-WB line and the refusal to alter
existing property relations are some important signals in this regard. In
other words, this is no 'revolution from above.' But merely an attempt at
better management of existing property relations.

But will they be able to manage even that? There are two inter-related
reasons which makes one skeptical. First, given the level of political
awareness and the huge bag of expectations created, for a dispensation that
draws its power solely from the barrel of the gun, it will have to
constantly confront the question of its legitimacy, notwithstanding any
legal proviso it attains from the courts. Because of its inherently
illegitimate nature, all its acts of omission and commission will time and
again raise the question of legitimacy. In other words, it will have to
deliver and deliver fast on a multiplicity of fronts to justify its
violation of the constitution and overthrow of an elected government.
Second, the institution to which the coup makers belong, i.e. the armed
forces, is part of the problem that afflicts state and society in Pakistan.
No other institution in the country is as opaque, unaccountable,
centralised and hierarchical as the armed forces.

This twin concern of legitimacy and the institutional interests of the
armed forces will continuously haunt this dispensation. Specifically on
three key areas of accountability, decentralisation and the economy, we
briefly analyse the chances of success to deliver.

Accountability

=46or all and sundry, accountability is the buzz-word. Come November 17 and
we will see that some retribution will take place - as in a few large
defaulters might be put behind bars - but little money will be recovered.
But surely those who are at the wrong end of the stick will not exactly lie
low and will raise some important and pertinent questions. The first
principle of accountability is that it should be seen to be fair. Other
wise one should not have had any problem with Naseerullah Babar holding the
PML accountable or Saifur Rehman accounting for the PPP's misdeeds. All
past attempts at accountability floundered because they were seen as
victimisation. A similar charge will soon be leveled against the armed
forces. An institution which gobbles up more than one fourth of the federal
budget and 5-6 per cent of total national income is not accountable to
anyone. Will the military declare its accounts for public scrutiny as is
done all over the world? If it does not, its moral right to hold others
accountable will diminish and diminish very fast.

The other issue is that appropriation of public resources does not have to
be illegal to be consigned as 'corruption.' There were several instances
where Nawaz Sharif and Benazir (the former moreso than the latter) changed
the rules and regulations to dole out cash grants or land/plots for
patronage. This practice, though legal, was perceived as unfair and hence
corrupt. The same should and will be said about the armed forces. Each
officer is entitled to one or more residential plots in the most exclusive
localities of all major urban areas at extremely subsidised rates. This is
perhaps the only legal recipe of becoming rich overnight that exists in
Pakistan.

Moreover, the armed forces have been 'feudalised' since colonial times. The
practice of doling out agricultural land to armed forces personnel,
initiated in the colonial period, still continues. This patently unfair
practice is best exemplified by the assets declared by the three armed
forces chiefs recently. Not only do all of them own more than one
residential plot (each worth several millions of Rupees) but all of them
have also been granted agricultural land. Little wonder that the CE has
already declared that there will be no land reforms.

As for kickbacks and illegal activities, again the question of who will
cast the first stone will be raised. Kickbacks on military hardware and
misappropriation of large chunks of resources during the Afghan war has
made a number of retired army officers filthy rich. The much maligned
politicians and businessmen - as indeed the general public -are perfectly
entitled to raise these issues. In short, with such an unaccountable and
closed internal structure of the armed forces and with all sorts of stories
regarding corruption within the army doing the rounds, the issue of
accountability will either have to be shelved soon or will again be
consigned to victimisation in the popular consciousness.

Decentralisation

It is often mentioned that military governments have the best record of
decentralising power. The Basic Democrats of the Ayub era and successive
local bodies elections during the Zia martial rule indeed demonstrate that
grass roots democracy was furthered by military regimes while democratic
regimes are generally seen as loathe to the idea of local government. Why
does the most centralised of institutions require decentralisation?

One tentative answer is that no matter how centralised a government is it
requires a decentralised network to legitimise its rule and to do its
bidding at the local level. For democratic governments, this job is
performed through the pyramid like structure of political parties. Given
the structure of the military and the illegitimacy of its rule, martial
rulers create this network through local bodies' elections. Given that this
local bodies network is beholden to the military regime for their new found
power, they do their bidding for the regime and create an alternative
political force to the political parties at the local level. In fact the
recently ousted Muslim League government was largely the creation of the
local bodies elections held to legitimise Ziaul Haq's martial law. Since
local power structures remain intact - as those who are elected only
reflect the existing distribution of economic and political power - the
next move is to enrich themselves through access to state largesse.

This is the extent to which this regime is also expected to decentralise.
Anything more substantive is neither in their interests nor will it be
acceptable to the status quo they represent. The result will be further
perversion of the political culture - as witnessed by the emergence of the
post-Zia Muslim League - and we will have to deal with another set of
rotten scoundrels, empowered and enriched by another dictator when
representative rule is eventually restored.

The Economy

Similar contradictions will emerge when the military will try to put the
economy back on track. One very important indicator of the economy's ill
health is its precarious fiscal situation. Foreign debt is said to be very
high and its servicing is becoming increasingly onerous with each passing
year. The budget deficit is also perennial and its reduction requires
curtailing both expenditures and tapping hitherto untaxed sectors for
revenue. On both counts, the institutional role of the army is one of the
most central impediments in breaking through the vicious circle.

The actual break down of the $ 35 billion foreign debt between civilian and
military expenditures is not given. But by observing assets created in the
civilian economy and also accounting for leakages, it can safely be
predicted that between one third and one half of this debt has been
incurred to purchase military hardware and replacements. Now debt raised
for asset creation in the civilian sector is in principle productive and
can and does generate some returns for its repayment. Because of
inefficiency in resource use, wrong identification of projects and
corruption, the ability of these assets to service their debts might have
reduced considerably. But military debt is inherently unproductive as it
does not earn anything to repay the debt incurred on its behalf. It is the
civilian economy which has the added responsibility - and this is apart
from maintaining the huge recurring cost of the armed forces - to earn
enough dollars to pay for the toys for the boys.

On the fiscal side, it is well known that more than two thirds of current
expenditure goes towards debt servicing and military expenditure. Military
expenditure itself commands roughly one fourth of this expenditure. Since
debt obligations have to be met, the only meaningful way to reduce
government expenditure is through slashing the military budget. A coup
carried out supposedly to maintain the institutional integrity of the armed
forces is certainly not expected to slash its own budget.

On the revenue side also similar conundrums crop up. The different armed
forces foundations put together are one of the biggest players on
Pakistan's industrial scene. According to some estimates (as their
financial statements are not public documents) their industrial assets are
roughly 15% of the total fixed assets quoted on the Karachi Stock Exchange.
Moreover, neither do the Foundations pay any income tax nor do they have to
follow the legal requirements of going public beyond a particular threshold
limit applicable to the private sector. Talk of a level playing field!

The only way that revenues can be meaningfully increased is by taxing the
agricultural sector and urban traders as well as the huge wealth generated
in the informal sector. The recent back-tracking by the Finance Minister on
the GST is an important indicator of things to come. Even at the height of
its honeymoon with the people, this all powerful regime does not possess
the wherewithal to take on the traders lobby for fear of losing legitimacy.
As for the agricultural income tax, the fact that a large number of armed
forces officers are themselves landowners, there is again a conflict of
interest that is expected to crop up.

The bottom line is that unless and until the army is willing to reduce its
claim on national resources little can be done to revive the economy and
put it on a sustainable path.

What to Expect?

As in all areas chosen for reform, the institutional structure of the armed
forces is part of the problem, it cannot be expected to provide the
solution. Its efforts at delivery are thus bound to fall far short of the
expectations raised. And whenever a government fails to deliver it resorts
to wielding the carrot and the stick. On the one hand, either individuals
or groups are bought off through monetary inducements or by granting
special favours and privileges. On the other hand, the stick is wielded. In
earlier martial laws, a mix of both were applied. With the fiscal situation
so precarious, more of the stick and less of the carrot is expected this
tiem round. Once the honeymoon is over, we shall see organisational rights
being curbed, the press being gagged and canons of justice being
increasingly violated. The exercise of violence, however, will be more
subtle this time because of the much greater need to show a human face
internationally and because technology has made media curbs largely
redundant.

It is abundantly clear, therefore, that given the structure of state and
society in Pakistan and given the institutional allegiance of the coup
makers the unfortunate events of October 12 have turned the clock back in
Pakistan by more than a decade. Soon (and one has the luxury of remaining
evasive about the 'time frame' these days!) a movement for restoring
democracy will occupy centre stage in the political discourse of the
country. Who will be accountable for this monumental waste of collective
time and energy?
_____________
#2.
The Hindustan Times Bangalore, November 6

SOCIAL WORKERS THRASHED:
Accused of converting villagers to Christianity
by K S Dakshina Murthy,

A GROUP OF college students were excited and satisfied. They had
successfully completed their day's social work in a remote village-a
kutcha road had been built, a bathroom had been constructed and the area
cleaned. None of them were prepared for the nightmare that was to follow
soon after. On the night of November 3, most of the 23 students were seated
in the small makeshift dining room awaiting supper. One of them, Preethi,
started serving when suddenly the door flung open and a group of armed
miscreants barged into the room. Recalling the horrifying incident, Preethi
said they indiscriminately began assaulting the students, particularly the
seven girls. "Are you here to convert the villagers?" one of them asked.
The terrified students displayed their identity cards, but to no avail.
The intruders, over 30 in number, from a local Sangh Parivar outfit,
accused the students of taking money to convert the villagers. Without
even waiting for a reply, they began to thrash the students. "You are
converting Hindus on the occasion of the Pope's visit," Preethi said,
quoting the attackers. "The boys ran helter and skelter, with some of them
managing to escape," Preethi said. "But we were trapped. Each girl was
accosted by at least four to five men who slapped us repeatedly, pushed us
down and used the filthiest possible language. They tore the clothes of
two of us," she said on the verge of breaking down. Three students had to
be hospitalised later on. The nightmare began at around 8.30 pm and
continued for over two hours. The village, Mysorammandoddy (M.Doddy),
far-flung and inaccessible, is nearly 15 kms from Anekal, the nearest town
with a police station. And, Anekal is itself 40 kms from Bangalore city.
But that night the village seemed so far from everything, said the
students. It had started off as a routine "rural exposure camp". The
prestigious Bangalore-based St. Joseph's evening college where the
students study has been undertaking this exercise for the past several
years. The students, among whom were Hindus, Christians and Muslims, were
informed they were going to M.Doddy to work with the nomadic Lambani
tribals, now settled in the village. Gnana Jyothi, a centre for integral
rural welfare, run by the Karnataka Jesuits which also manages St.
Joseph's College, was the local guardian to guide the students. (ENDS)
------
#3. FILM SCREENING

Nathiyin Maranam (Death of a River)

Director: R. R. Srinivasan produced by Kanchanai Film Society, Tirunelveli

on: 20 November 1999 at: 6.30 p.m. venue: Max Mueller Bhawan, Kasturba
Gandhi Road, New Delhi

The video tells the story of police brutality. On 23 July, 1999, in
Tirunelvali, the police opened fire on a peaceful rally of dalits who were
going to the collector's office with a demand for the release of 700
workers of the Manjolai Estate. Apparently, the police first lathi-charged
the protesters and then resorted to firing that killed 17 persons
including a woman and a child.

The video uses visuals of the incident and interweave these with
narratives of persons who survived the police onslaught. The video,
according to the director "is a humanist statement against such
caste-based actions and activities as was witnessed along the
Tamirapaani."
----------
#4.
=46OCUS / The Hindu, Nov 7, 1999

Army court summons journalists=8A G U N N I N G F O R T H E P R E S S

A military court of inquiry at Leh has summoned two journalists from
reputed news magazines to appear before it. Both had published critical
reports of the government and army's handling of the Kargil crisis.
Military courts in democracies do not summon citizens. The Government's
message is blatant-mess with us and we'll hit back=8A never mind that the
journalists were being honest about their work. P. SAINATH on the far
reaching implications of this step, for which there is no precedent.

IT COULD PROVE THE MOST SERIOUS development for the Indian Press since the
Emergency. Yet not a single newspaper has thought it worth an editorial so
far. A military court of inquiry at Leh has summoned journalists to appear
before it. Ostensibly, the court seeks to probe the leakage of
confidential documents during the Kargil conflict. The implications of the
step, however, go far beyond that.

There is no precedent for this. Military courts in democracies do not
summon civilians. Much less do they get into the business of bullying
journalists. And that is clearly what the whole exercise is aimed at.
Also, at getting reporters to reveal their sources through such coercion.

The documents mainly relate to Brigadier Surinder Singh, then commander of
the 121 Independent brigade in Kargil. They seem to show that he had
warned quite early of a Pakistani intrusion. His views appear to have been
dismissed at the time as alarmist.

It's more than a month now that the court of inquiry summoned journalists
from 'Frontline' and 'Outlook' to appear before it in Leh. Both magazines
have declined to send their reporters to appear before the court. Both had
run reports critical of the handling of the Kargil crisis by the
government and the army. Now the latter's message is blatant: mess with us
and we'll hit back at you by any means. Never mind that the journalists
were doing their job honestly. Never mind that the public had a right to
know about the serious failures that magnified the crisis.

The event marks a new low in the use of the armed forces as a political
instrument by the BJP. And as an instrument of vendetta. Perhaps we should
have expected no better of George Fernandes and the RSS-BJP. Here is a man
who has long traded on his being a victim of the Emergency. But who wastes
no time in using tactics that reek of that period against journalists who
dare criticise him. And here is the RSS-BJP now in power- determined to
make the Indian army even more like its highly politicised counterpart in
Pakistan.

But we could surely expect better from an army with an impressive record
of remaining non-political and secular. A section of the army brass has
gone a step beyond briefing George's BJP buddies in a private meeting.
They've tarnished a proud institution further by seeking to bully the
minister's critics for him. There's no mistake about it. What's happening
here is at the behest of Defence Minister George Fernandes and the
RSS-BJP. It couldn't happen otherwise.

There's more. At the same time the military court acted against the
journalists at one level, the army has moved at another. It has gone to
the Press Council asking it to take "suitable necessary action" against
the "reporter, editor, publisher and printer" of the 'Asian Age'. This for
carrying reports "against the standards of journalistic ethics."
Translated, that means reports critical of the army brass. So the army
seeks to have it both ways. It wants to browbeat journalists through
military courts. And it wants the Press Council to punish them as well.

It doesn't seem to matter that summoning reporters to disclose their
sources-which is what they are doing through the military court-violates
the Press Council Act. But they approach the same Council for action! The
Act says that nothing shall be done to "compel any newspaper, news agency,
editor or journalist to disclose the source of any news or information=8A."

So a section of the army decides to pursue the sources through the
military court. And tries to harass the journalists through the Council at
the same time. Clearly to please its friends at the Centre and to settle
personal scores.

Even the Punjab government-not quite a beacon of human rights or press
freedom-has acted differently from the one at the Centre. In June this
year, the Home Affairs and Justice department of that State sent a
directive to all district heads and magistrates. Its content was clear. It
told them to ensure that reporters and editors were not summoned for the
purpose of disclosing their sources of news. It ordered that the practice
of trying to force them to do so be stopped immediately. "Henceforth, no
communication should be sent to reporters or editors in this regard," says
the directive.

As some of those summoned by the military court have pointed out in their
reply, there is no legal basis for its action. We cannot debate the
surreptitious changes introduced in 1992 in the Army Act which seem to
give it the power to summon civilians. There are, however, far greater
political issues involved. Not the least of which are the implications of
such measures for democracy itself.

One, trying to force journalists to reveal their sources undermines the
freedom of the press. This in turn reduces its capacity to make government
more accountable to the public. Two, it's the thin end of the wedge. If
the principle of summoning civilians and journalists before the military
court is legitimised, where will it lead? Where might it end? What does it
mean for the rule of law?

More immediately, this could set the pattern for the intimidation of the
government's critics. The BJP and its allies are old hands at this game.
The BJP-Sena government in Maharashtra ran a state which saw the largest
number of physical attacks on journalists between 1995-98. In power at the
Centre, it seems logical that the Sangh Parivar should adapt these tactics
to other situations.

In Maharashtra, those tactics worked in their raw form. So much so that
when a leading editor received serious threats to his person from the Shiv
Sena, his own paper blanked out the matter. Publications whose reporters
had their skulls or limbs fractured by goons remained silent. At the same
time, the editors of those papers chose to be highly visible at the
parties and functions of the very Sena-BJP people responsible for the
terror. Their managements found it gainful to keep good ties with the
saffron brotherhood.

The message then, as now, was clear: get co-opted or face the consequences.

The substance of what the BJP is doing at the Centre is no different, only
the tactics and levers vary. Here, it is the misuse of official power-and
the armed forces-without a qualm. The Presiding Officer for a court of
inquiry is Brigadier A.K.Duggal, deputy general officer commanding 3
Infantry Division. Would Duggal dare take the step he has on his own? Not
a chance. Not without the instigation of people very high up in the
political pecking order.

The selective nature of the "inquiry" gives the game away. Only
'Frontline' and 'Outlook' have got the summons. Other publications carried
much the same or similar documents as these two in some cases. But they
have received no summons. Perhaps their overall line was not as critical
of the mess up in Kargil?

=46urther, the man responsible for setting up the court is Duggal's
immediate superior, Maj. General V.S.Budhwar, General Officer Commanding 3
Infantry Division. This is the officer who last year and this year hosted
the RSS-led Sindhu Darshan Festival. Last year, army troops under his
command did almost everything from building the stage to looking after
guests at the RSS show. Those facts about Budhwar were revealed in a story
in 'Frontline' and the reporter, Praveen Swamy, seems to be paying the
price for that. So personal vendetta comes into it as well. But here's the
central reality: none of this is possible without a go-ahead from George
=46ernandes and the BJP government.

The complaint of the army to the Press Council worries, among other
things, about the "character assassination" of Gen. V.P. Malik in the
press. On that score, they need have no fear. Nothing said in the
newspapers could possibly go further than the General's own actions in
hurting his reputation.

In his time, generals and air marshals appeared before the national
executive of a political party to "brief them" on the Kargil situation.
The first and only time that has ever happened in the history of this
country. In his tenure, generals have used army resources to help RSS
functions like the Sindhu Darshan Yatra. They have also graced those
events as honoured guests. It was in this period, for the first time, that
the Indian army begins to mimic the politicisation of its Pakistani
counterpart. Never before has the army so crudely acted at the behest of a
political party, picking on the latter's critics to intimidate them.
Compared to Pakistan, that may be just a beginning. But it is a most
dangerous beginning.

We are not at the stage of having our own Najam Sethis abducted and
beaten. But we have clearly begun down that road, thanks to Goerge
=46ernandes and the RSS-BJP. It is no accident that the notices were sent
precisely to those reporters seen as a nuisance by George and the BJP. The
political motivation is painfully clear. The tragedy is that a section of
the army brass has gone with this.

Also truly worrying is the silence within the press. On the other hand, a
real threat to its freedom stares them in the face. On the other, senior
editors congratulate themselves in public on the 'force multiplier' role
their journals played in the Kargil conflict. Most newspapers have anyway
eulogised the army's performance in Kargil. More than a few killed stories
from their own reporters that revealed serious mishandling of the crisis.
Some editors have taken it on themselves to be the army chief's
consultants. One political editor of a leading daily even faxed him advice
during the Kargil conflict on how to manage the media. This willingness to
toe the establishment's line makes the whole situation that much more
dangerous. Because the choice before the press on such an issue is an old
and sadly simple one: hang together. Or hang separately. (###)

### T H E F A C T S

THE ARMY HAS SET UP a court of inquiry to probe the leaking of documents
relating to the Kargil conflict. This court has summoned journalists from
'Frontline' and 'Outlook' magazines to appear before it in Leh.

The Presiding Officer for the court of inquiry is Brigadier A.K.Duggal,
deputy general officer commanding 3 Infantry Division. The journalists
summoned are: Praveen Swamy of 'Frontline' and Nitin A. Gokhale, Ajith
Pillai and Vinod Mehta of 'Outlook'.

Some of those summoned have challenged the legal basis of the whole
process. And the given date for their appearance in court, October 12,
passed off uneventfully. But it is obvious we've not heard the last of
this controversy.

Brigadier Duggal's summons say the court is for "investigating the
circumstances under which allegedly contents of confidential
communications were made available to unauthorised persons by Army
personnel in contravention to the Official Secrets Act 1923. I do hereby
summon and require you to attend as a witness at the sitting of the said
Court at Leh on the twelfth of October 1999, at 1000 hrs. and so to attend
from day to day until you shall be duly discharged, whereof you shall fail
at your peril."

What does "To attend from day to day" until "duly discharged" mean in this
case? It could mean any length of time that amuses the military court. The
journalists could be kept indefinitely in Leh at the whim of the court of
inquiry.

Importantly the summons is silent on the provision of the law under which
the court of inquiry has been set up. Nor does it detail its jurisdiction
or terms of reference. It says nothing on who will bear the high costs
involved in the journalists, travelling to and staying in Leh as
"witnesses". (ENDS)

______________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH is an informal, independent &
non-profit citizens wire service run by South Asia Citizens Web
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since1996.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D