Crossing the lines

December 26, 2009 § 15 Comments

As if the likes of Dr. Shahid Masood, hosting pseudo-politicians like Hamid Gul, spinning their endless tales of conspiracy theories was not enough, I was pretty surprised to read a column in Nawa-i-Waqt today. Seems like we live in strange days where power shifts from army to judiciary and media and parliament in nowhere in the scene.

The recent series of events makes it clear how certain media outlets have specifically targeted the ruling party and been exaggerating things against them, which also would perhaps explain the unneeded and rather immature statement along with the ruling on NRO given by the Supreme Court. One of the hawks of lawyers’ movement, Ali Ahmed Kurd, himself lashed on SC over such an unnecessary move and pointed out that SC judges were treading a very dangerous line, making rather political moves.

I must say it’s not that hard to connect the dots here. At one side, rightist media outlets along with the power of a major media group have taken their position against PPP generally and Zardari in particular. And no matter what, they don’t seem to be stopping at anything but their removal. While that’s the situation, their aggravation of the affairs pretty much led to all the noise over NRO and the post-NRO-ruling.

This creates a picture where media is bringing things, by sort of creating a hype, to SC’s consideration and SC, empowered by what I may call media support, is making rather reckless decision. The parliament is entirely out of the scene and in fact, the entire ruling party is like held accountable for cases that aren’t yet proved against them. I don’t have anything for PPP but I believe that such a situation means only one thing: media is striving it’s best at either derailing the democracy or else is playing at the whim of other political players who already are in the good books of SC judges. Either way, the pieces fit.

Coming back to the column I read today, the great writer suggested that army and judiciary should join hands in order to bring the corrupt politicians to justice. This is just too much! The guy, in other words, is simply telling army to help judiciary destroy the democratic structure since his ‘suggestion’ entirely rules out the inclusion of parliament in the picture. It’s flabbergasting how openly these columnists are proposing such outrageous possibilities.

And let me show what the connotation is: the connotation is that SC is making such statements as this where it suggests the government to take the aid of eunuchs to pressurize corrupt personnel. I mean…what the hell! Where is it all going! How can a sane person even suggest that – and not to forget, SC’s suggestion was a ‘serious’ one, not one made in humor. And to top that, Geo was pretty quick in launching an interview of Bobby Almas, citing her ‘special strategy’ she’d launch to carry out SC’s suggestion.

So the point I am making is: with the unlimited support of a deeply biased and very immature media, SC is on the way of making controversial decisions, which may (let’s hope it doesn’t) at one hand, compromise SC’s own credibility, and at the other, damage the democratic structure irreparably, thus giving army another excuse to intervene. And considering the current security crises we are going through, I believe now would be the most unfeasible time for such a happening.

About these ads

Tagged: , , ,

§ 15 Responses to Crossing the lines

  • Umer Toor says:

    How’s late said’s ‘orientalism’ going? I am pretty much interested in this work…

  • Salman Latif says:

    To be honest, it’s halted for now. I’ve read some one-third and it’s not the sort of book you’d do away with in short respites during daily chores. It’s content is like…heavy and laden with knowledge, dry and yet interesting. And I’ve postponed it to a time when I’ll have some time to myself – most probably the upcoming semester break.
    Btw whatever I read, it was great! Edward Said’s research is profound and he’s the one shaped who really shaped the orientalism and defined it away from the west’s usual biases.

  • Umer Toor says:

    So it’s worth reading really.. hmm

  • Natasha says:

    Bobby Almas was being interviewed by Lucman as well.I think it’s a good advice.Has already been followed in India by the way.

  • Salman Latif says:

    I sure would love to know the details of how it’s followed in India and what, if at all, it yields because it’s pretty beyond me how someone who doesn’t give a damn to the law and possibility of incrimination would give any more damn to eunuchs in front of his house. It rather sound funny to me how SC even expects that to work.

  • Natasha says:

    Enunchs asking for money back would be an attack on the ‘mardangi’ of the political enunchs.

  • Salman Latif says:

    That sounds good in rhetoric – but practically speaking, that is of no actual significance.

  • Anas Shafqat says:

    I totally agree with you on this, Salman. Media is “actually” working to derail democracy – and lol, its no wonder now why they were banned earlier. They are not spreading awareness, rather they’re polluting the minds of people with their own assumptions and theories.

    Hmm okay. SC’s decision is “historical”. I get that. But what I don’t understand how could it make a decision that threatens to destabilize the entire structure of country?

    And .. the eunuchs might work, you know :p Its no harm in trying, you know. Maybe kuch gairat aajaye :p

  • Salman Latif says:

    We desperately need a media regulatory ordinance, one which’d carry it’s purpose in a balanced manner without abusing it.

  • Anas Shafqat says:

    Right. The minute the ordinance comes in, the channels would start screaming!

  • Tazeen says:

    Oh it was such a refreshing read, esp when judiciary and lawyers have turned into holy cows.

  • Natasha says:

    They should take the media men into confidence before passing an ordinance.

  • Salman Latif says:

    @Anas
    Exactly! Who would want to be ripped of an unquestioned freedom? ;)

    @Tazeen
    Thanks for liking the peace. :)

    @Natasha
    I agree – they should evolve an ordinance in collaboration with the media men which should be balanced and hence, shouldn’t hinder either freedom of speech and at the same time, shouldn’t accord unlimited powers and freedom to the media.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Crossing the lines at 'Tis my say..

meta

%d bloggers like this: