Legitimising Dishonesty

Publisher and Managing Editor IKRAM SEHGAL  wrote this article for THE NATION which the DJ is re-producing with thanks.

Most coups are popular with the public at the time of their launching, very few survive the test of time. The coup-makers arrive full of sincere intentions, a burning will to correct the anomalies that endanger the State and a stated resolve not to allow temptations of the good life to get to them. Unfortunately they almost always fall prey to the system they are sworn to rectify. The Oct 12 event seemed to be different but is showing ominous signs of being headed the same way. Man for man the principal actors of Oct 12 are professionally far more competent than their predecessor coup-makers (1958, 1989 and 1977), very surprising, therefore, that the lessons learnt at very hard cost to the reputation of the uniform have been lost, or so it would seem. Cynics claimed that Oct 12 came about because Musharraf’s close aides wanted to save their jobs rather than motivation by any high-minded vision for Pakistan, they were swept aside by the groundswell of mass public opinion favouring the take-over. As we all know perceptions change with time, eventually they count more than facts, public impatience at the continuing status quo may not be justified but it is a key factor.

The chapter on “Aid to Civil Power” in the Manual of Pakistan Military Law (MPML), highlights the threat of the use of force being more potent than the use of force itself. Conversely when force is applied it must be effective. Internal Security (IS) Duties require that even the threat of force must be used sparingly, the body that represents that force must necessarily be kept aloof from the populace to maintain mystique, familiarity breeding contempt. This military regime, albeit in good faith, has seen fit to break this dictum, a broad spectrum of the rank and file getting involved with nearly every administrative process in day-to-day governance. From maintaining macro-accountability as the principal aim, the Army has come down symbolically to meter-reading. Given that the whole political and administrative machinery was rotten to the core, the Army needed to be kept sacrosanct from the taint of pervasive corruption. The revenues have indeed increased, not only because of the khaki meter readers but because of the “monitors” spreading out in various spheres, but at what cost to the Army? And what happens when they go back to the barracks? The worst decision was to include serving uniformed personnel in the tax survey teams for documenting the economy. If the facts are reported by the ISI, MI and Field Intelligence units as they are and not as the seniors would like to hear them, the military hierarchy could evaluate the damage to the uniform because of the traders confrontation with the survey teams. The CBR suckered the Army into this morass to shield their own inefficiency and corruption, the numbers being announced are a farce with which the Ministry of Finance is fooling GHQ. Remember who are the past masters of fudging figures? Most of those returning the forms are already registered tax-payers. Documentation does not need survey teams, it could have been done within the four walls with the available telephone, gas, electricity and water bills, collating these with property records with the Registrars. Random surveys should have followed documentation. Far worse than a simple protest against tax surveys, the authority of civilised society to conduct the legal business of a State has been challenged, that invisible mandate being the foundation of any civilisation. The State has to impose taxes to meet its expenditures, that revenue is the fuel that generates  governance. Refusing to pay taxes to the British, the Americans tossed tea chests into Boston Harbour as a protest, it is now known in American History as the “The Boston Tea Party”. What does Umar Sailya’s burning of  tax survey forms on the front pages of all newspapers amount to, “The Karachi Mango Party”? And could Umar Sailya be a modern day Daniel Boone? More important the power of the military has been questioned, this public defiance of authority cannot go unchallenged, lack of counter-action will weaken the ability of the institution that holds Pakistan together. Others with far deadlier intentions lurk in the shadows. Will the senior military hierarchy kindly wake up to this very present threat? Or have they succumbed to business as usual, getting contracts for cronies, savouring the trappings of power? Was the Oct 12 coup then really a matter of saving jobs? Whatever happened to Clauswitz and the first principle of war, “the selection and maintenance of aim”?

Most of my class were 10 and 11 years of age when we first met Farooq Adam in 1958. The Head of Peake House in Lawrence College Ghoragali was a real life hero to us, “Ady” could do no wrong. As tough with us as any House Prefect could be, nobody could try and bully the smaller kids while he was around. When he was selected as the No.1 cadet in PMA Kakul for the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, Gallians (as Lawrence College students are known) were not surprised. A brave and honourable person, his Sitara-e-Jurat in the 1965 war was very much in character and very well deserved. The Attock Conspiracy case in 1973 was out of character, Ady’s destiny could well have been to lead this Army if his career had not been cut short due to this misadventure. During the years of prison, others bemoaned their fate, Ady versed himself in law, a new career was started. As Prosecutor General, no one can doubt his focussed intention, however Ady was always a better soldier than he will probably ever become as a lawyer. Requiring recurring amendments to plug legal loopholes, mistakes have made the NAB Ordinance into a legal nightmare, a lack of experience rather than that of knowledge, one of omission rather than of commission or intent.

The latest amendment to NABO allows the Chairman NAB to set free those who return the money they have illegally made due to a whole variety of reasons, this legitimising of dishonesty under “The doctrine of necessity” is not only shocking but immoral. One day Mr. Sultan Lakhani and Amin Lakhani were in NAB custody, next while Sultan Lakhani is still enjoying NAB’s hospitality, Amin Lakhani is seen standing next to an Air Marshal and a Major General signing an agreement for a Macdonald’s outlet at the airport. It gives wrong signals all around. Is that the type of association to encourage? Moreover giving percentage incentives to serving NAB officials paid out of government estimates is as wrong as it is right to give due rewards to credible private investigators i.e. excluding those local reps who have been in smuggling automatic weapons (for use by their private security companies) and took large kickbacks on equipment when they were in a position to do so. How can NAB associate with such scum? For that matter has NAB the impartiality to investigate them? Or is this taboo under the doctrine of necessity since they are helping in getting back illegal wealth from abroad? Those who know Farooq Adam well (his Gallian classmates included) believe both issues cuts against the personality and conscience of the man. Those who know Amjad well also swear by his honesty and integrity, then who is belling the cat in NAB? Acquiring wealth by illegal means is no different from petty thieves stealing money, so should we set robbers and dacoits free if they return the goods they have stolen? Should we make it more a “calculated risk” than “a game of chance” that the maximum that could happen if one gets caught is that you will have to return the illegally acquired wealth? Revenues cannot be raised at the cost of the ethical foundations of the State. Once you legitimise dishonesty, you undermine the moral authority that sustains governance, the law of the jungle takes over.  

Compromising morality in the search for revenues, the next step would be to legalise drugs, money-laundering and terrorism, already the business of the State in many third world countries. The reality is that we are comfortable with the presence of money-launderers in the highest reaches of the government, such presence is a contradiction of the moral base of the military regime. Therefore, it is hardly appalling that people of the stature and character of Farooq Adam should become party to laws that discard conscience for convenience. Nevertheless, I pray everyday that Musharraf should succeed, for in his success lies the salvation of Pakistan. Musharraf proved himself as a leader of men on Oct 12 when the Army as an institution stood beside him like a rock. The Chief Executive conversely has a responsibility to ensure the moral uprightness of the State, by personal example. Running a country is not a 9 to 5 job with weekends off. As a man of professional competence (and known decisiveness), Musharraf can do far more for this country putting pragmatism ahead of theoretical concepts and personal egos, not allowing his civilian aides to con him by glib rhetoric into legitimising dishonesty and corroding the foundations of the State permanently.