Intellectual morality
The saga of Marcoses and Jayalalitha earlier and now Benazir Bhutto, confirms the fact that no matter what the corrupt of this Earth do, if they are charismatic enough a die-hard bunch of followers will remain faithful to them, come what may. Even when they know that their beloved leader is a crook, they will not leave them. Given their political nuisance value, these leaders have to be handled with care or they may benefit from a sympathetic backlash that could well sweep them back into power. Without a qualm of conscience, those in uniform or without will salute them again, citing “constitutional” necessities. As much as those presently in power would like to gain maximum political mileage from their legal discomfiture, their propaganda has to guard against over-kill, particularly in low literacy areas like Pakistan where perception has far greater weightage than reality with a rather naive general public. Public memory is notoriously short and economic conditions being what they are, it does not take much for mass opinion to swing to extremes because of extraneous factors.
What is more worrying is the attitude of those who are not only educated and intelligent but have chosen to serve the people of the country by going the political route. In most cases they are sophisticated and wordly-wise, many are articulate in expressing their beliefs and convictions. While one expects them to be loyal to their leaders, one also expected them to be more loyal to the people whom they profess to serve, the balance weighing in favour of the public rather than any leader. Leadership involves inculcating in one’s character and personality, honesty and sincerity of purpose, stated lofty aims and ambitions for the country and the public etc. The old adage for a leader remains, “the glory and honour of the country comes first, the welfare and contentment of the masses next and one’s own safety and comfort last”. The leader being found lining his or her own pockets at the expense of the public coffer, the entire basis for leadership is compromised, calling into question that person’s competence of being a leader in any category. Corruption has been endemic in Third World countries and while we pay a lot if lip-service to eradication thereof, how come a whole lot of us resile from holding the interest of the country first and the welfare of the country next in decrying corrupt practices among leaders, even those whom we may have once revered?
The case study of corruption among leaders in Pakistan is Benazir Bhutto. PPP’s leaders showed themselves to be men of straw when they could not warn her about the shenanigans of Asif Zardari. Here was a person who had a family name but no money, practically having no ideology except the worship of money and power, using the power of his wife’s political potential to make money, which in quantities would guarantee him political power. When Asif Zardari (AZ) married Benazir he was both almost bankrupt and a political nobody, yet by the end of her second term he had more power than she ever exercised as PM and more money than any Pakistani had ever made legally or illegally. This was more because there are legal limits to what one can pen on paper as PM, the spoken word has greater sway in Pakistan, it leaves no “smoking gun” paper trail and many people found to their detriment they could lose their jobs (and maybe even their lives) in defying (or delaying) immediate compliance to instructions given. No one in PPP, at least among the leaders, can say otherwise without being called a liar.
One had no illusions about the extent of AZ’s powers from 1993 to 1996. Yet no one among Benazir’s political party had the courage to ask that he be reined in, very obviously she bristled when the Opposition or the print media pointed out her husband’s extra-curricular activities. Even now she brazenly continues to deny it. Almost everyone gave her the benefit of doubt as to her involvement in her husband’s affairs. But why did not people like Gen Babar, Sen Aitzaz Ahsan, Sen Iqbal Haider, Naveed Qamaruzzaman, Aftab Sherpao, Farooq Leghari (before he became President), Kamal Azfar etc warn her that AZ was going beyond the fail-safe norms of political divide which envisages as its central theme honesty and integrity? This is a mystery that is very difficult to comprehend.
The SGS case has shown that Benazir was an accomplice in some of AZ’s financial ventures, if not an equal partner in many of them. The Government of Pakistan (GoP) says in the SGS-Cotecna case that, viz (1) the award of the contract was influenced by Benazir as PM and should not have been awarded in the first place (2) it was awarded for a consideration (3) the consideration was financial in payment of commission to two offshore companies owned by AZ and operated by a Swiss national (as is the normal modus operandi in most offshore companies) (4) because of the contract the exchequer suffered financial loss. Whether influence was used to award the contract and whether GoP suffered financially are proforma issues on which Benazir’s lawyers are basing their defence, the evidence from Switzerland they say is fabricated, despite a Swiss Judge verifying it. The point is why should SGS, an internationally well-reputed company, acknowledge it has paid out US$ 8.6 million to the two offshore companies? And for what reason? And why was it necessary for AZ to have the offshore companies? And if the evidence is false, why does not SGS sue GoP for defamation? And lastly, why do not Benazir and AZ publicly proclaim, as Sen Khalid Anwer has advised, that the monies in the accounts of offshore companies (as well as all monies in any Swiss accounts “purported” to be theirs) are not theirs and should be transferred to GoP as they do not belong to them? Why does not Ms Benazir go to Switzerland to clear her name? Regretfully, one must conclude that in the SGS case, Benazir took part of the “commission” doled out by SGS as “bribe” and by accepting this she compromised the principles that govern country leadership. She is compounding this by telling blatant lies in denying the obvious. Any educated person, having even the slightest knowledge of industry and commerce, would come to the same conclusions, then why do not people like Gen Babar, Sen Aitzaz Ahsan, Sen Iqbal Haider, Naveed Qamaruzzaman, Aftab Sherpao, Kamal Azfar etc accept the obvious, given that these people are respected and are assumed to have intellectual morality? They have a duty to the electorate that voted them into office, a duty that transcends blind loyalty to their leader. They have a duty to their country that transcends blind loyalty to their party and its leader. And if they cannot differentiate between what is the higher calling, loyalty to the public and the State in contrast to that to the leader, then they run afoul of the concept of intellectual morality that measures their fitness to be any part of governing the country. Those PPP’s leaders who are not on the horns of a dilemma have no conscience, what to talk of having intellectual morality!
The same measuring scale is equally applicable to the PML and its leadership. The parameters are different and it is certainly not for corruption, but many of the Sharif family hierarchy have been indicted in the Al-Towfeek case in London for loan default. Their many bank defaults in Pakistan are understandable, given the persecution and financial witch-hunting they had to face during the period 1993-1996, however the London judgement is very damning and needs adequate public clarification by the Sharif family. While there is a wide difference between active corruption and loan default because of extenuating circumstances, the Sharifs must give a credible explanation of the default without falling back on legal technicalities. Some industrialists have made loan defaults into successful businesses, obviously the Ittefaq Group cannot be tarred with the same brush because the evidence of their credit advances are very much on the ground. However public perception is notorious in equating image with reality even when they do not coincide. At one time, the Sharifs publicly announced sequestering their properties in favour of the banks to pay back the outstanding loans from the proceeds. Some factories were mentioned, that initiative needs to see the light of day quickly. The Sharifs are now governing Pakistan and it is their bounden duty to clear the controversy to maintain the mantle of integrity in their leadership, otherwise like acid it will erode their credibility to govern. As much as one has admonished the PPP leaders for not giving restraining advice to their Leader-ene, it is important that such advice must be given to the Sharifs about straightening out their bad debt situation.
As much as Benazir would like others to believe it so, the Sharif’s family overdues do not entitle her equal opportunity to go the corruption route with or without her husband. There is a world of difference here, like chalk to cheese. She would like the world to believe otherwise but nearly everyone knows the truth about her husband. Those that pretend otherwise have a different tale to tell in private and must be held in contempt and incapable of holding the reins of governance in Pakistan, not only their heart and soul but their minds have been corrupted. Those who do not have intellectual morality as a guiding principle should never be allowed to govern Pakistan, ever.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment