Share this story!            

LETTERS:

Post letters to Letters to the Editor, The Daily Times, 41-N, Industrial Area, Gulberg II, Lahore, Pakistan Phone: 92-42-5878614-19; Fax: 92-42-5878620 E-mail: letters@dailytimes.com.pk Letters may be edited for length and clarity

Pakistan’s Star Wars

Sir: Pakistan’s Hobbesian life rarely imitates art. Yet the resemblance between the Hollywood movie series “Star Wars” and our recent political drama is hard to ignore.

The first three movies chronicle how a Dark Emperor, assisted by his turncoat deputy Darth Vader and an army of clones, takes over a galactic democracy called the ‘Old Republic’. Some members of the old republic collude with the emperor and are rewarded. Supporters of the republic are forced into exile. These are distinct echoes of the 1999-2006 events in Pakistan.

The fourth movie is sub-titled “A New Hope”. A ragged resistance rises and inflicts some damage to the Empire. In Pakistan, this new hope arose during the March to July 2007 movement to restore Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Its success damaged but did not end Gen Musharraf’s rule. The dictatorship retaliates and pummels the resistance in the fifth movie, “The Empire Strikes Back”. The dissenters are forced to retreat into hiding and exile. Anyone who watched the bloody events of May 12 in Karachi, the Sept 28 decision of the Supreme Court, and the violence of Sept 10 and 29 in Islamabad will understand perfectly the meaning of the empire striking back. This is the phase we are going through now.

The conclusion to the movie series is called “Return of the Jedi” in which the resistance gathers forces, defeats the empire, and restores the republic. Will Nawaz Sharif be the returning Jedi? Will Benazir Bhutto replace Ch Shujaat as Darth Vader?

If we know Pakistani history, however, there is little cause for optimism. Unlike the galactic variety, our republic may never be restored. The defective DVD of our authoritarian political life might get stuck at “The Empire Strikes Back” for a while and then, like all bad discs, return to Part 1, appropriately titled “The Phantom Menace”. Keep watching.
KHURRAM DASTGIR-KHAN
Lahore

In defence of PTCL

Sir: Is it possible for us to move beyond individual complaints to look at some entities and their performance more broadly and fairly? I mean to speak specifically of PTCL about which Mr Salman Rashid wrote in your newspaper on October 7. At the minimum, I find Mr Rashid’s remarks unfair and off the mark. PTCL’s growth has been exponential. This wouldn’t be the case if its customers were unhappy with its service and rates. Surely, you cannot judge a company on the basis of the odd complaint in service here or there. I use PTCL because its network is vast and reliable, it is now cheaper than ever to call outside the country and it offers much better rates than any company in or outside the region on broadband.

Nothing is flawless. Everything is comparative. My own experience, and I am a subscriber like Mr Rashid, with PTCL’s customer service is very pleasant. The staff is polite, cooperative and quick on the ball. Complaints usually do not take more than 48 hours to be addressed. Once when I had a billing complaint, the issue was promptly addressed to my satisfaction. It is easy to constantly criticise; and we normally write to cavil. Never to praise.
SHAHZAIB KHAN
Lahore

Wrong time, wrong place

Sir: According to a news report (Daily Times, Oct 6), the Supreme Court on Friday allowed the present assemblies to conduct the presidential election on October 6, 2007, but directed the Election Commission (EC) to keep the results classified until a final decision is reached on the petitions challenging the candidacy of President General Pervez Musharraf.

I find this quite paradoxical because the basic dispute is whether President Musharraf is eligible to run as a presidential candidate. If his papers have already been accepted by the EC and he has contested the election, any further SC decision is anachronistic.

It is also interesting to note that these petitions were filed much before the final date for filing of nomination papers and yet it is not clear on what grounds and capacity the EC accepted President Musharraf’s papers and declared him eligible to take part in the presidential election. Why did the SC not respond and intervene at the time when the nomination papers were being filed? Why did the SC not postpone the said election until a decision was reached about the eligibility of President Musharraf? I think it is quite clear what the result of this election will be.
NASIR RIAZ
Lahore

PPP’s abstention

Sir: PPP stalwarts, in reply to a question by a TV reporter outside the National Assembly building at around 9:30 am — minutes before the start of the polling — announced that they would not vote and instead abstain. When asked further as to what had taken them so long to announce this decision, the reply was that the decision had been taken a few days earlier in London and was in accordance with their original stance of not voting for the president in uniform.

Who are they trying to fool? The whole nation knows what BB was waiting for before announcing her decision on voting. And now once again she is trying to fool us by saying that the PPP will not vote and instead abstain. Let us not forget that ‘abstain’ is a valid form of vote (there are three types of votes — Yes, No and Abstain). If the PPP did not want to vote, they should have boycotted the election by not coming to the assemblies, or cast the ‘No’ vote. ‘Abstaining’ in the elections is a definite form of vote — a ‘neutral’ vote that is generally taken to ‘augment’ the party polling the majority of votes.

PPP’s actions are basically a tacit approval of the assemblies electing the general in uniform. The PPP is basically sending this message; that we will not resign from the assemblies and cause any legal impediments in the way of your election. And further, by participating in the election (by casting a valid ‘abstain’ vote) we will legitimise the right of the dying assemblies to elect a president for the next five years beyond their lives.
COL RIAZ JAFRI (RETD)
Rawalpindi

Long live the CJ

Sir: After the reopening of the Lal Masjid on the orders of the SC, no unwarranted incident has occurred as opposed to the previous reopening by the government, when the Federal Minister of Religious affairs as well as the ministers of religious Alliance MMA were shoved and pushed from the mosque by followers of the Ghazi brothers.

It is evident that when the rule of law is applied without any discrimination, the outcome is positive; the government’s selective rules resulted in flouting of the law by the aggrieved parties.

One hopes that our CJ with the support of the lawyers’ community and the proactive media would continue to provide justice to all without any discrimination. It is a fact that while our government machinery and opposition parties are busy, like almost all previous regimes, in political manoeuvres and palace intrigues to overpower each other, the judiciary under the present CJ is the only hope for the downtrodden. On the issues that hurt millions such as price hikes, jirgas, child marriages, karokari etc, only the CJ has provided relief to the common man. Therefore, we pray that the CJ may live long and remain on the venerated position to provide justice to the people of Pakistan.
GULSHER PANHWER
District Dadu

Home | Editorial

Share this story!