WHY DEMOCRACY?

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/12/27/why-democracy/

• Is democracy worth holding on to?

For those who want to hold on to democracy it is important to remember that democracy─ the real democracy which rarely exists─ is the rule of the people. That does not necessarily mean, does not even often mean, the rule of what is right.

So then, what is ‘right’? Doesn’t the concept of ‘right’ vary from thinking person to thinking person? For example, some people might think it is fine to compare religions and then decide which applies to you, while others might prefer to take the faith approach and hang on unvaryingly to what they once accepted as correct. Which of them is ‘right’? What’s more, who is to decide?

It often seems as though ‘right’ as a definite circumscribed set of things exists only in the minds of the herd which accepts because they’re expected to accept without much thought.

Which seems to make democracy acceptable solely because it is the will of the majority, not because it is right.

For democracy to be ‘right’ the decisions of the majority need to be right as well. That might work in an educated society (although not necessarily so) such as Switzerland which is probably home to the ‘realest’ form of democracy on earth, but what of the less educated places, or the wildly less educated places such as Pakistan and India? Would you say it is right to persecute people because of their faith? That certainly appears to be the majority opinion in India and in Pakistan. Is it right to generally base one’s opinion on a narrow view of the world such as happens in these two countries? If such is the view of most of the people in these countries, then can any real democracy exist in countries like these?

So should democracy be sustained  not because it is necessarily right, but because it makes people happy? Does democracy make people happy?

Sadly, that does not appear to be the case either.

Eric Weiner, a few years ago, studied that very question and speaks about Moldova, once part of the USSR. He found Moldova to be the epitome of the unhappiest set of people in the world. That is not because the country is not democratic, it is, or because Moldovia is poor– it is poor but not as poor as Bangladesh for instance, but because of certain cultural attitudes that ‘belittle the value of trust and friendship,’ values that ‘leave no space for the happiness of hope.’ So, an unhappy democracy. Is that an oxymoron?

Eric Weiner once again quotes Inglehart as saying that “to assume that democracy automatically makes people happy is to assume that the tail is wagging the dog.” Comparing China with the countries of the former USSR, the Chinese are apparently much happier than the Russians are. As for one of today’s apparently democratic countries, the USA, as per a 2019 Pew Research result, it came up with 58 percent of its people saying they were unhappy, specifically with the way democracy was functioning in their country. So no, the tail is definitely not wagging the dog.

So why is democracy such a big thing?

It is a big thing because there is no alternative. Yet democracy is in crisis, which must be addressed.

Arundhati Roy says: ‘The crisis of modern democracy is a profound one. Free elections, a free press and an independent judiciary mean little when the free market has reduced them to commodities available on sale to the highest bidder.’

Roy is, as always very right. But in this case she does not go far enough. There is that thing called the constitution that allocates power: who holds the power, and how much.

Think USA. One must keep doing that because that country has so pushed itself under everyone’s nose as the greatest democracy in the world. It had not reckoned with Donald Trump who arrived, it must be admitted, because of democracy. That in itself must be enough to push the whole concept into the ground, but one must not be as arbitrary as that. Yet it was Donald Trump who ensured that the Supreme Court was loaded with his personal appointees prior to the elections. Trump’s accusations of unfair elections have failed in every state, mainly because there was no proof to support the claim. He has claimed that his accusation should be heard by the US Supreme Court but himself accepts that this will be difficult to achieve. Probably, if there were a way to take matters to the Supreme Court Mr Trump may succeed in overturning the elections by means of his appointees in that Court.

Instead he has resorted to a pardoning and murdering spree before he is forced to leave office, executing death row inmates, and pardoning proven criminals who have claim to his friendship.

Why is this President, or any President, given the power to pardon and execute? How does that fit in with the capabilities of a man or woman who was elected to govern the country and who in Mr Trump’s case has no legal knowledge at all, who would be hard put to pronounce legal terms if it ever came to that. If a person is guilty of and has confessed to a crime, it is the law courts who must punish that person or let the person off. If a person is condemned to die, it is the law courts who must assess their behaviour and their crime, it is the law courts that must take steps to free them or carry on with a punishment.

A judge, be it in any country must be a neutral, well paid individual which puts him or her beyond bribery. He or she must not be a political appointee which completely negates the idea of neutrality. Any hint of such a thing should be considered a crime worth the highest punishment.

A person who contravenes the neutrality of the judiciary must be liable to the same punishment as awarded for treason. To uphold the independence of the judiciary, to strive for justice must be the supreme factor in any democracy.

And it is only a free press, and a public that is free to speak, that can ensure this.

The leadership of Pakistan appears struck by the problems faced by the newly elected President of the USA with regards to a handover from the previous government. That is valid. But will the leadership also take note of how important it is for the judiciary to be independent? An independent judiciary with judges free from persecution is the most important factor in a democracy. Without that there is chaos and no justice.

ACCHA

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/12/19/accha/

The Cambridge dictionary this month made ‘accha’ available to the English speaking public. As incorrectly pronounced as ‘Iraq’ by the dictionary’s own British and American English pronunciation guide, the word is defined as an exclamation meaning ‘yes!’ and a word of agreement as in ‘that’s good.’ But really, the word is much more versatile than that.

There’s the triumphant “Accchha” when Donald Trump lost the elections, a reaction that had little to do with a Republican defeat and everything to do with the defeat of the particular person holding office all that way across the world.

Then there is the incredulous eye rolling “Accha!” as when Imran Khan claimed there was no mention of Jesus Christ in history.

There are other examples.

A disgusted “Accha!” and an incredulous one as a comment on Sheikh Rasheed’s appointment as Interior Minster. Sheikh sahib, if you remember, felt it necessary to add to Imran Khan’s intelligent statement about a possible military confrontation with India by reminding India that Pakistan was a nuclear power with small warheads capable of targeting and destroying particular targets. Sheikh Rasheed was then the Minister for Railways.

“Acha!” in the same tone follows the appointment of (Dr) Firdous Ashiq Awan, who in yet another cabinet reshuffle recently has been appointed special assistant on information to the Punjab Chief Minister Mr Usman Buzdar. Dr Awan rolled over from the PPP to join the PTI and was once focusing on the healthcare system not too long ago when she was still with the PPP, and was then unaware of the existence of time release capsules. There she stood, staring down at an expelled capsule and her incredulous and perplexed “accha!” was heard through the corridors of the drug regulation department, and led to the unfortunate removal from office of some people who were better informed such as the then Federal Government Analyst.

The “Accha?!” following Dr. Awan’s appointment is aptly followed by a ‘Good Lord!’ particularly since she has recently made the intriguing remark that the mask is insufficient protection as the coronavirus can sneak in via the nether regions.

Whatever the reason for such appointments, including that of Mr Vawda, they serve to do nothing but drop one’s opinion of the current government, if there were space for it to go any lower.

So then there’s the happy ‘Bohat Acha!’ a ‘Very good indeed’ when the Pakistan born molecular biologist Asifa Akhtar recently won the Liebniz Award, one of Germany’s most prestigious awards for scientific research. It’s good to get such positive news, particularly these days. Ms. Akhtar works for the Max Planck Society. Eighteen scientists from this society have been recipients of the Nobel Prize. Perhaps Ms. Akhtar may one day receive that honour as well, although again perhaps it’s better not to wish that on her, seeing the fate of other Nobel Laureates from Pakistan.

Such as Malala Yusufzai the activist who merits a sad, resigned “Acha.” Malala, the youngest Nobel Laureate ever, a young and courageous Pakistani woman we should be proud of, instead her countrymen shunned her following the events that led to her Nobel Prize.

Such as Abdus Salam, the theoretical physicist and Nobel Laureate, also from Pakistan. Recently his house in London has been declared a national heritage site. The house has a plaque on it which reads: ‘Abdus Salam 1926-1996, Physicist, Nobel Laureate and Champion of Science in developing countries, lived here.’

Yes he did. He had to, because he was not allowed to remain in Pakistan. ‘Accha,’ (with a pained look and a sigh) for him.

It is sad that the pleased ‘Accha’ is rare with reference to what takes place in this country.

It merits a disgusted ‘accha’ as well as an incredulous one that the President of Pakistan has recently signed off on an order that allows chemical castrations of men accused of rape. Rape is rarely a simple sexual matter. It is mostly a twisted manifestation of power and is often accompanied by murder or extreme violence. For this reason it is common in feudal societies such as Pakistan, and even more common in homes where the fact that a husband rapes a wife or a child is ignored, or in this society not considered to be rape. This is a society where judges are rarely neutral and officialdom is easily bought off. To castrate or kill a person accused of a crime is fraught with danger. It is very likely that only the poor will be subject to punishment and the rich let off. There is also the danger of the wrong person being accused of a crime on purpose.

Far more than the crime is the need to concentrate on the attitudes that make such crimes occur, that make them so common in Pakistan where women have few rights. But for a government that wishes to be seen to be doing something….accha…., chemical castration makes sense for the government.

THE LONG AWAITED VACCINE

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/12/12/the-long-awaited-vaccine/

Russia has started vaccinating using the Sputnik V vaccine, although it is still in the process of being mass-tested. The Pfizer vaccine has been approved in the UK where vaccinations are well under way. Pfizer has approval in Canada, and has just received the same in the USA.

Pakistan hopes to have a vaccine ready to use by the first quarter of next year, perhaps the Chinese CanSino Biologics, a single dose vaccine which is going through its phase 3 clinical trials, with volunteers from several countries including Pakistan.

Whichever vaccine appears on the scene in Pakistan, one hopes it will be handled with due planning and organisation, and with a genuine view to help the people of the country instead of the privileged few. It is not something Pakistan can pride itself on generally, neither planning nor indiscriminate provision of benefits to all.

The ‘flu vaccine which, when available is expensive, and thus that puts it out of the reach of most people. This season it has not been available in Pakistan at all. This, despite warnings that this year in particular people need to be vaccinated against influenza.

Pollution this year has probably been worse than in previous years. As with the ‘flu, respiratory problems associated with pollution make people more susceptible to other infections. An added risk is that if a person is infected with covid-19, a cough will spread the covid-19 virus to all within range. Yet nothing much has been done to improve the quality of air in places like Lahore and Faisalabad, which is important in any case regardless of covid-19. Yes, some factories that (mind-bogglingly) use rubber and plastic as fuel have been shut down. Such shut-downs happen every winter. It gives rise to the obvious question: how did/do such ventures manage to exist and function in the first place?

Several things need to be prepared in advance for covid-19 vaccinations, proper storage facilities such as freezers, sufficient equipment such as protective gear and syringes, and oxygen. There has to be provision for emergency care in case of adverse reactions. There must also be facilities for proper disposal of the syringes used in the vaccination.

The population of Pakistan is about 220 million. Even if quarter of those people get vaccinated that means 55 million syringes in addition to the syringes used as a norm in the country. That is a lot of hazardous plastic waste. Nice thing if next year these syringes are used for fuel by those factories that have just been shut down. Also what an irony if, after getting a grip on covid-19 the incidence of HIV rises steeply because syringes were re-used, as happens.

Recently in Peshawar covid-19 patients died because there was insufficient provision of oxygen for their use. Given that one of the features of this disease is the need for oxygen in serious cases this is an almost incredible oversight.

Another factor to guard against is misinformation that spreads as fast as the disease itself.

The American CIA did Pakistan no service by using the callous, thoughtless methods they did in their hunt for Bin Laden, using the services of Dr Shakil Afridi, who however says he did not know that he had been employed by the CIA.

Dr Afridi conducted a hepatitis-B vaccination campaign in the area around the house where Bin Laden was hiding. The plan was to analyse the used syringes to look for any DNA belonging to relatives of Bin Laden.

A relative’s DNA was not identified, but the DNA of a man known to have close links to Al Qaeda was. Bin Laden was captured as a result, but the ones who lost out were the people of this country.

The religious brotherhood had long been spreading fears that vaccines were causing harm to people, and that vaccines were a tool by means of which ‘The West’ sought to render the people of Pakistan infertile. Well the people of Pakistan do not appear to be infertile in the least but the accusations about vaccination programmes being a Western tool were certainly borne out thanks to the CIA, although not exactly the way it was claimed.

The long and short of the incident was that vaccinations have taken a hit, as have the men and women charged with administering them. It has been many years since that event but since then the incidence of polio in Pakistan– which had dwindled– has risen dramatically.

The Taliban called for a ban on polio vaccines and action against those administering them. As a direct consequence many polio workers and security personnel protecting them have been killed.

Similar rumours and misinformation are likely to latch on to the covid-19 vaccine.

Indeed religious extremists have been a thorn in the side of the country since its inception, yet nothing has ever been done to curb them. Even something so innocuous as the adhan (call to prayer) which can be beautiful and a real call to prayer if well executed is obviously not within government control. It issues five times a day as loud as a horde of Mongols– badly pronounced and utterly unattractive.

Another point, by no means the last but a big one, is the question whether or not the covid-19 vaccine ought to be mandatory. Whatever decision one comes to, the same would apply to other vaccines such as the polio and other childhood vaccines unless it is medically advised against for some reason.

This is a debate which must be resolved. There appears to be a rule in existence making vaccinations ‘compulsory’ in Pakistan, yet like many other injunctions there is no follow-up and no one checks to see if this rule is upheld.

Is it even possible to uphold it? It is doubtful.

And yet. Manslaughter is a legal term for homicide. It is less culpable than murder since murder includes an intention to kill, while manslaughter does not. Yet manslaughter is punishable by law.

Not taking a vaccine can and does lead to a rise in the incidence of infection, as we have witnessed often but most recently now when there is as yet no vaccine against covid-19 and people persist in neglecting adequate preventive measures such as masks. Nobody intends to harm but harm does result.

How, therefore is not taking a vaccine any less than manslaughter?

But seeing how almost impossible it would be to make vaccines mandatory, it has been suggested that making them mandatory could be achieved on an institutional level. This question needs some thought.

For governments that are in the habit of thinking, and planning, these points and questions are of crucial importance. Is Pakistan one of those countries?