A Mango Republic?
In every country of the world, patronage is built into the system in some form or the other. In the developed countries where democracies are stable and accountability is a part of the system, the potential for favouritism for material or monetary gain may be severely circumscribed but is still very much present. Denis Thatcher was eulogised for being an obsequious husband of the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, however son Mark was ostracised by the media for any number of major business deals. In countries of the Third World where leaders depend upon a small coterie of the rich and powerful for the acquisition and sustenance of power, there is virtually no dependence upon the masses. A Client-Patron relationship becomes much more part of the system than in developed nations. The cycle of favours ensures continuation of power, patronage ensures a mutual loyalty born out of the need for survival. The disease of patronage is not confined to Pakistan alone, that it has become rampant in this country over the past two decades does make this country a part of a more select group of nations as far as nepotism and corruption is concerned. We used to poke fun at the “Banana Republics” of Latin and South America, today we are not much different in style as well as content. As nationalists we should use our national fruit as a symbol in being labelled as a “Mango Republic” or at least being well on the way to its becoming.
The most insidious form of patronage in this country is the allotment of plots and the sanctioning of loans. Recently the Lahore High Court has taken suo-moto action to ask for details of all the plots allotted by the Chief Ministers of Punjab since 1985, the Martial Law Administration (1977-1985) having taken care to have all its actions validated and not being subject to questioning (whether any illegal acts of commission by responsible people in public office can ever be so condoned on the point of a gun is a matter of debate and conjecture but not the subject of this article). Given 1985 as a marker for discovering the wholesale gift sale of public property, the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court, Mr. Tiwana, should at the very least question the CMs about what great public service the beneficiaries performed to deserve the largesse. In order to ensure fairplay, the same exercise should be carried out in the Federal Territory and all the other Provinces. Prima-facie it would seem that many of the allottees do not even have correct addresses or have more than one plot. One wealthy and influential gentleman residing in KDA is the beneficiary of as much as 12 CM-bestowed plots, albeit in different names. It would not seem out of place as to question how such a farce was contrived and enacted by leaders who unabashedly proclaim themselves guardians of public morality and should have known better i.e. if they feel any fiduciary responsibility to the masses they were pledged to serve selflessly. Besides being an act of corruption, it is sheer hypocrisy.
Looting of the Public Till
The main reason for nationalising the banks in 1974 was that credit was never available to the masses, it simply got circulated among the wealthy coterie of few families. Bhutto was absolutely correct in his premise and, to an extent, successful in spreading credit to a broad spectrum of aspirants. Nationalisation created its own inherent ills to go with its advantages. With the bureaucracy’s discovery of the potential of financial strength as a source of power, a new mixed elite of banking executives and financial bureaucrats came into existence, answerable to nobody. The result has been unbridled loot of the banks for the last decade or so that has surpassed standard corrupt practices of kickbacks and graft in the Third World by miles.