Self-accountability-the Decontamination Process
The final accountability being that rendered by the masses at the polls, should not the public expect the political parties to themselves filter their candidates through a pre-electoral weeding process to ensure that they pass measure at various levels leading to the anvil of the Ehtasab (Accountability) Ordinance? The recurrent failure to carry out accountability has brought a once vibrant economic engine fuelled by a dynamic people resplendent in hope to its knees, the last three years at the hands of a band of looters who would put vultures to shame. Not that any thief has ever accepted guilt (to quote renowned columnist Ardeshir Cowasjee “which thief will give you a receipt?”) without being faced by incontrovertible evidence but seldom has there been such highway robbery and then a brazen display of shameless feigning of benign innocence as by the members of the universally unlamented late government of Ms Benazir Bhutto. Unfortunately that is their benign right under the laws of the land unless they are brought to justice.
We have to studiously guard against a rush of judgment. As columnists and journalists, except for investigative journalists like Ardeshir Cowasjee, Kamran Khan, Kaleem Omar, etc we have seldom access to hard evidence, we simply articulate the mass perception. In doing so we fall into the Catch-22 trap of kangaroo courts insofar as we mix truths and half truths that feed on each other mixing these such that the palate of the population becomes anxious and hungry to apportion blame. A responsibility devolves upon us to verify the accuracy of what we put down in print, more so because in our haste to lay accusations and see the looters brought to justice we may be unknowingly playing into their hands because hastily levelled accusations run the risk of being shown to be without depth and substance, it is more difficult to cast doubt on hard evidence obtained more deliberately. Some of us are also guilty of letting our own personal bitterness and frustrations get the better of our own judgment, in effect we attempt to project as the truth what we would like to believe is the truth.
Virtuality
Despite PM Ms Benazir Bhutto’s wide-eyed poker-faced disclaimer about corruption (what corruption?) to the David Frost question in his Breakfast Show, “Virtual Reality” is that the corruption perception index for 1996 produced by Transparency International (TI), a multi-national organization dedicated to curb corruption in international business, places Pakistan second in corrupt countries behind Nigeria, adjudged to be the most corrupt (not by far) among the 54 countries surveyed. Among the least corrupt countries, New Zealand was first i.e. at No 54. In order of rascality among the Muslim nations (other than Nigeria that preceded us) Pakistan was followed in order of demerit by Bangladesh (at No. 4), Indonesia (at 10), Uganda (at 12), Egypt (at 14), Turkey (at 22), Jordan (at 25) and Malaysia (at 29). It is scant consolation that India is not far behind us (at No. 9 position) in the corruption stakes. Should we be happy that we are more corrupt than our perennial arch-rival or hang our heads in shame that even they are less corrupt than we are? To some of us it is a matter of embarrassment, to those who have worked overtime to put us on this shameful pedestal, does it really matter?
According to the article in Financial Times (Monday June 3, 1996), TI, with Headquarters in Berlin, defines corruption as “the misuse of public power for private benefits”. It tries to assess the degree to which public officials and politicians in various countries are involved in such practices as siphoning bribes, taking illicit payments in public procurement and the embezzling of public funds. TI’s summary of findings is based on 10 international business surveys, most conducted among foreign businessmen doing business with the survey-target countries. In the past three years we have deteriorated rapidly in the corruption stakes, sliding from a low of 2.25 points out of 10 in 1995 to even low 1.00 point in 1996, being bracketed by Nigeria’s 0.69/10 and Kenya’s 2.21/10 (at No.3 position). At the reverse end of the corruption scale, New Zealand retained its LEAST CORRUPT status but fell slightly from its high of 9.55 out of 10 (1995) to 9.43/10 (1996). Even the so-called “Banana Republics” that people in (and out of) uniform are usually scornful about are considerably less corrupt than Pakistan, the closest being Colombia at 15th position with 2.73 points out of 10.