Can Gilani be ousted?

PM Gilani. Source: DAWN

The court has won and democracy has lost. In an excellent strategic move by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the cheif justice has diverted all media attention from his son , Dr. Arsalan Ifthikar, shifting the new focal point towards Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gillani.

The Journalists are jubilant. The court's decision has given them a chance to enshroud the recent Media Gate scandal. Nineteen top journalists were working on Mr. Malik Riaz's pay roll. They were illegally defending a capitalist, who had strong ties with the elite of the Pakistan Army and political establishment. The video leak was a puncture in the Journalist-Capitalist-Military union. Someone had to save them from drowning, and behold! The court came to their rescue.

At a juncture where the Supreme Court should had focused on how money manages the intricate power balance, how capital manipulates media attention, and how capitalists and generals agree upon large housing enterprises; the court took an easier path through the forest. Certainly, solving the Media Gate scandal would have allowed the nation to understand the dynamics of illegal capital in Pakistan. It would have unearthed the names of many more corrupt generals, journalists, politicians, and judges. The Supreme Court could have helped in purifying the money supply mechanism in the country, but it failed to do so.

The Supreme Court has directed its attention towards a case that will only help in damaging the immature democratic dispensation. The whole premise for ousting PM Gillani is that he hasn't fulfilled the courts order to file a case against the current president of Pakistan, Mr. Asif Ali Zardari. Is a piece of letter that much important that a nominated prime minister should be forced to leave his office? Will the next PPP prime minister write such a letter? What will the Supreme Court do, if the second nominated prime minister also disobeys the court's order? Will the Supreme Court also oust the second? The decision will only catalyse the present instability in the country. It has opened a new constitutional Pandora's Box, which can only be closed after the end of this government's tenure.

The Court knows that it has opened a Pandora's box. The question is why are they destabilizing the country? The Supreme Court doesn't want to topple the status quo. It's helping the military elite like it has always done in history. It is bringing smiles on the faces of the Punjabi ran establishment. It is helping the noxious and money-hungry media tycoons and journalist. It is weakening democracy, so the chief justice remains the undefeated saviour who can solve all problems of the country. All in all, the decision is going to maintain the status qou, and the power of the majority would still remain in the hands of the non-legislative institutions of the state.

Apart from all this, the decision is unconstitutional from the perspective of any democratic norm. In a democracy, supremacy lies with the majority. It doesn't lie in the hands of a clergy, judiciary, or army elite. The chief justice has no power to topple the decision which 180 million Pakistanis gave in February 2008. He should at least respect the basic premise of democracy that Aristotle told 2400 years ago:

"Democracy arises out of the notion that those who are equal in any respect are equal in all respects; because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal."

But in today's Pakistan, democracy has become - in the words of Emerson - a government of bullies tempered by editors. In our context, the bullies are the judges while the editors are the media journalists.

Now, the Supreme court insists that the Prime Minister should write a letter to the Swiss authorities. The constitution is very clear about the issue presidential indemnity. Article 248 of the constitution states:

248. Protection to President, Governor, Minister, etc.

(1) The President, a Governor, the Prime Minister, a Federal Minister, a Minister of State, the Chief Minister and a Provincial Minister shall not he answerable to any court for the exercise of powers and performance of functions of their respective offices or for any act done or purported to be done in the exercise of those powers and performance of those functions:

Provided that nothing in this clause shall be construed as restricting the right of any person to bring appropriate proceedings against the Federation or a Province.

(2) No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or a Governor in any court during his term of office.

(3) No process for the arrest or imprisonment of the President or a Governor shall issue from any court during his term of office.

(4) No civil proceedings in which relief is claimed against the President or a Governor shall be instituted during his term of office in respect of anything done by or not done by him in his personal capacity whether before or after he enters upon his office unless, at least sixty days before the proceedings are instituted, notice in writing has been delivered to him, or sent to him in the manner prescribed by law, stating the nature of the proceedings, the cause of action, the name, description and place of residence of the party by whom the proceedings are to be instituted and the relief which the party claims

Why is Mr. Iftikhar Chaudry insisting the Prime Minister to follow an unconstitutional order? Has he not read the constitution? I hope he must had read it.

Rather than solving Dr. Arsalan Ifthikhar case, the CJ has consciously saved his son. Just look at the timing of this decision! Two weeks back, an eminent civil rights activist, Ms. Asma Jahnegir said that 17 judges have no right to rule 180 million people. Then came the issue of DR. Arsalan Ifthikhar bring CJ's son in the  limelight. Next, the SCP (Supreme Court of Pakistan) passed a decision declaring the former Pakistani Ambassador to USA, Mr. Hussian Haqqani, a traitor. Meanwhile, the Media Gate scandal completely destroyed media's credibility. 

This latest decision is the golden egg in the SCP's basket. The Chief Justice will call it a personal victory, while the journalist will view it as an excellent propaganda to cover their ills. 

For me, the recent move by the chief justice is undemocratic by the very definition of democracy. Noam Chomsky commented:

The most effective way to restrict democracy is to transfer decision-making from the public arena to unaccountable institutions: kings and princes, priestly castes, military juntas, party dictatorships, or modern corporations.

The people of Pakistan would never allow a specific institution to seize their constitutional right to govern themselves. 

The media capitalist relationship

A recent video leaked on YouTube has triggered one of the biggest media controversy in Pakistan. The video shows two Pakistani journalists doing a predetermined interview with the business Tycoon Malik Riaz. The off-air discussion between Mr. Riaz, Ms. Bukhari, and Mr. Luqman,shows how capitalism runs the media for pursuing its goals. The video is 30 minutes long. The two journalist act as if they work for Mr. Riaz:

Mehar Bukhari (B) : `Say what you want... what question should we ask. It will appear as though it is planted...

Mubashir Lucman (L) asks Riaz (R), `Give me a villa like you have given Hamid Mir [who hosts a show at Geo TV]`. 

During the program Luqman also gets angry, while Riaz tries to bring him back to the program. 

***

Mehar Buhkari and Mubashir Luqman in the leaked video

The video shows how capitalism controls every aspect of life in the society. It is capital which allows someone to buy journalist, judges, and generals. In a corrupt society like Pakistan, capital can do wonders. The leaked video is a test case example on how a capitalist use illegal means of power to influence the state. 

The journalist asks for a villa, proving him to be a lapdog of the capitalist elite. The market principles are what dictate the ethics of the journalists. The only unethical attitude, is the one which creates hurdle in the easy flow of capital. Mr. Talat Hussain rightly says:

"میڈیا کا سب سے بڑا احتساب مارکیٹ خود کرتی ہے"

"It is the market to which the media is accountable"

The only purpose for setting up a media industry - or any industry - is to make money. The biggest source of money in a media industry is through advertisement, which comes from large business tycoons. The owner of a media group can never speak against these tycoons, as speaking against them, only diminish their annual profits. No media group want this, and hence the bilateral agreement for the enlargement of market becomes stronger and stronger.

A question arises that why are many media groups criticising this leaked video? The reason is simple; Market principles force them to do so. The media industry runs on the public viewer-ship. If the viewer-ship decreases, this will automatically reduce the advertisement time; hence a decrease in profit would be registered. The money designated for the news media might go to other industries where people have a greater interest. Therefore, the internal critique by the media is an attempt to regain the 'trust' relationship with the viewers. This internal critique is not against the capitalist elite or media corruption; rather it is an attempt to strengthen the media-capitalist relationship.

The Journalist Judiciary alliance will also gain strength. The whole news media industry is supporting the Supreme Court's self-motivated action against the leaked video interview. Any friction is the mechanism of JJ alliance will cause inefficiency in the media propaganda mechanism. The journalists support all unconstitutional decisions made by the Supreme Court, while the supreme courts everyday suo-motto action allow the electronic media to develop sensational dramas. Secondly, a weak JJ alliance means a weak Mullah-Military alliance. Untrustworthy journalists cannot perform effective propaganda. In brief, the internal media criticism will strengthen the alliance between the judges, journalists, and capitalists.

In the coming we are going to watch prime time discussion programs related to the leaked video issue. At this point, the public should understand that private media is a capital creating machine. It has nothing to do with helping the society, or the weaker classes. This leaked video is not an aberration in the media industry. This is how the industry works. Mehar Bukhari comments:

 'ایسا تمام ٹاک شوز پر ہوتا ہے تو ان پر کیوں تنقید کی جا رہی ہے۔ ’یہ سب کرتے ہیں۔

"It happens all the time on talk shows. Why are we being criticised? All do this"

Media Clowns in Pakistan

source:  globalresearch.ca

It's is near impossible to present a new ideology, thought, or opinion in a 1000 words editorial or a 40 minutes commercial laden talk show. 

It is the great media disguise which has turned cynics such as Haroon-ur-Rasheed, Irfan Siddiqui, Oria Maqbool Jan, and Ansar Abbasi into self-posed intellectuals. These characters occupy the media screen and rote the same piece of information again and again to make it a part of our sub-consciousness. They repeat meaningless sentences which makes them meaningful for the commoners, for example:

"Imran Khan will clearly win the next election"

"There was no terrorism before September 2001"

"Zaradari and Gillani are corrupt"

"Everything's wrong in Karachi due to MQM"

"Haqqani's a traitor"

"We need a saviour!"

These actor-cum-journalists try to pose themselves as if they are some great intellectuals who should be respectfully heard. Their distorted chatter in at par with the chattering at any local bus stops. They have no respect for alternate opinions and ruthlessly interject anyone speaking against the general media propaganda. For example, Ansar Abbasi posed himself as an Islamic Ghazi in Hamid Mir's program in an effort to nullify Dr. Hoodbhoy's logical claims. A similar case occurred when Asma Jahengir was on line in a talk show while Haroon-ur-rasheed constantly interrupted her.

The question is, why does the nation listen to such clowns? This is a wrongfully constructed question. It assumes as if the nation listens to few independent observations and then arrives at a decision through a personal dialectical process. The media propaganda process is never an individual thought process. The nation hears the general media perception times after times, which then became a subtle opinion in their minds. In prime-time programs (7 pm-10 pm), many actors solidify the agenda of the day. They use poignant speeches, rhythmic poetry, flaring eyes, beatific rhetoric, some pieces of Islamic history, sometimes they even cry out, and so on. It is such a master piece of drama that it mesmerises everyone. 

The process of deciding the propaganda topic of the days is still an abstruse process. No one really knows how the system works. We don't have a book like Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent for Pakistan. I hope one day, some Pakistani intellectual will try to demystify this propaganda mechanism is Pakistan. Despite that, we can still understand the outline of this media propaganda mechanism through everyday news articles.

Consider the Hussain Haqqani case.

The media projected Mr. Haqqani as a traitor. Aforementioned Journalist (or TV clowns) used every tactic they had to pursue this 'holy' goal. The story of tagging the ex-Ambassador as a traitor doesn't start with the memo myth; rather it goes back to the issue of the Karry-Lugar bill.

Pakistan army was agonized when two US senators subjected US aid to Pakistan to some internal congressional conditions. This included a check as to where the American money is being spent by the army. The bill also insured a future of sustainable democracy in Pakistan. The army was in no mood to accept such 'democratic' conditions, which triggered the media propaganda mechanism.  The army loathed Hussain Haqqani whom they accused was responsible for passing this bill. Working on the dictates of their masters, the paid journalists took on the goal of defaming the Pakistani ambassador.

With all their rhetoric, the defamation campaign again Mr. Haqqani was a failure. The army failed to defame Mr. Haqqani. This agony of losing against a civilian was what triggered the memo myth. This time these extremist journalists were supported by cricketers and politicians. More anti-Haqqani rhetoric was on-air. Baseless sentences were written by columnists in news papers. With the naturally backing by the armed force, the media propaganda mechanism was at its peak. The judiciary was also subdued. This time the manufactured consent was more powerful and more absorbent in the general sub-consciousness. Haqqani has no chance to win, and thus an unarmed civilian lost the battle.

In the Memo myth, one visible fact is the synchronization of army's opinion with the media's opinion. The media propaganda mechanism always tries to increase confusion in the general public, while completely harmonizing the media-army relationship. 

"Conflict" is the catchword for any great drama, and the news media knows how to keep conflicts alive. The net beneficiary of this conflict is always the armed forces and media groups; always belittling politicians and civilians.

This propaganda mechanism theory is applicable in many cases, for example, media propaganda regarding Asma Jahangeer and Prime Minister Gillani. Moreover, the mechanism applauds all actors who are speaking with the same tongue as the military elite of Pakistan, for example, Imran Khan and Right-wing Islamist extremists.

The propaganda mechanism described above is not quite clear yet. More scholarship and research is required to decipher the internal working of this system.

More reference:

http://www.viewpointonline.net/tv-debates-progressive-should-boycott.html

Another Biased Decision

Following its tradition, the Supreme Court has passed a biased decision on the Memo Issue. The court accused Hussain Haqqani (former ambassador and professor at Huston University) of treason.

A moderate Pakistani has been ousted by the Pakistani judiciary. The decision was not passed on the basis of constitutional norms and ethos; rather the court hearkened to the popular voices on the media propaganda machine. Sycophants, cynics, and extremists with their hate speech and blabber tried to subjugate the cowered judges. The judges reciprocated to these voices, passing a decision against the finest ambassador Pakistan ever had in the United States.

Imran Khan — a senseless character who ridicules all opposition and questions with a big laugh — accused Mr. Haqqani to be a US Ambassador of Pakistan in Washington. In other words, he was calling him a traitor. The cricketer used anti-Haqqani rhetoric to drive his utopian campaign for freeing Pakistan from all ills in 90 days.

The Chief of ISI, Shuja Pasha, also aligned with the unknown Mansoor Ijaz. He also believed that the memo was really written by Mr. Haqqani. The army knew it was false. Supporting Mansoor Ijaz was an excellent tactic to discourage all voices that speak against military interference in Pakistan. The support was a signal rather than an approval of Manzoor Ijaz's testimony. 

It can be observed that many journalists, the entertainer Imran Khan, and the ISI are all against this man. Any person who speaks for democracy and rule of the majority is seen as a traitor. Anyone who speaks — or even signals — for dismantling the military-political hegemony is called an anti-state element. Anybody trying to say the truth is brutally discouraged. 

The judiciary, following the dictates of their owners, has given a decision which was quite anticipated. We cannot hope for justice in a society were "khaki uniform and seventeen judges" rule. There is no justice in a country where a judicial commission believes a man who loathes Pakistan and calls a diplomat a traitor. There is no justice where the judges cite Khalil Jibran, while they themselves concede military dictators. Justice is an abstraction in a country where judges follow popular demands and act on the whims of the chorus.

The judges have deliberately arrived at an incorrect decision, reducing their position of prestige.

The JJ alliance

In the bygone days we read about how Pakistan army orchestrated alliances with Islamists  to win a war in Afghanistan. In those days, Pakistan was the breeding and training ground for the warriors in Afghanistan. Islamic parties sponsored money and men in hope of controlling the future of Afghanistan, while the United State backed the ISI in the delicate balancing act of forging a relationship between the CIA, and Mullahs (i.e. Islamist).

This is one of the darkest chapters in Pakistan history, with effects that will haunt this country for many generations to come. This was the period when fundamentalism was forcefully used for seeking strategic national interests. The army supported the mullahs by giving them power, while Mullahs in turn supported by providing men willing to sacrifice their lives. We passed through the 1980s as the MM (Mullah-Military) alliance aggrandized into a hegemony. Unfortunately, some parts of this alliance went out of control and are today wrecking the country.

Apart from this MM alliance, a new alliance has also developed. This is the JJ (Judges-Journalists) alliance. This JJ alliance is weakening the already fractured democracy by discussing accusation against politicians (especially PPP politicians) without any legal proofs or justification. Anchors with weak information source, biased opinions, cynical outlook, and elongated rhetoric try to influence and distort the psyche of the common people as well as the Pakistani judiciary. These judges play a complementary role, similar to that of Mullahs, by giving such news bites excessive credence. This excessive credence leads to a series of suo motto (self taken) notices in which the judiciary discriminates specific politicians highlighted by clairvoyant journalist. The JJ alliance mechanism works as follows:

JJ alliance mechanism

A millionaire journalist blabbers on his talk show or scribbles words in his column. The judges read the column and correspondingly order the politicians to come to the court. The politicians begs for mercy, as if he was surely guilty.

Doing an utilitarian analysis will prove that the JJ alliance is quadruple capital gains for individuals. The millionaire journalist gains extra rating, his newspaper or TV channel gains new viewer-ship making his boss happier. The judges also gain public courtesy, as in Pakistan we supposedly allege politicians for all wrongs (an idea infused by the military establishment in Pakistan). The politicians loses moral ground, hence weakening democracy and allowing non-democratic forces to takeover. 

This JJ alliance is as harmful to the country as the MM alliance was in the 1980s. Numerous examples can be quoted to proof this allaince:

1) The Atiqa Oddo Alcohol Sou motto notice.

2) Mosa Gillani case.

3) Hamid Saaed Kazmi Hajj scandal.

4) Hussain Haqqani's Memo Scandal.

5) Swiss bank cases pending for 10 year are resurrected by the professional diabolical rhetorics.

6) Accusation against Ameen Fahim.

7) Highly synchronized propaganda against Jamshed Dasti's fake degree, while the only edge these journalists have over Dasti is their adored cosmetics and three-piece suits.

8) The crying Ansar Abbasi is very vocal in this JJ alliance.

In future, this JJ alliance might consider a merger with the MM alliance. The MMJJ pvt. ltd. company will be a tough challenge to the people friendly forces in Pakistan. People should know their rights and speak against any supra-structure in which they don't have domination.