Few days ago, the News Forum had called on the journalists, political activists, politicians and people from all walks of life to forge an alliance to save the freedom of the press. They had invited them all for a discussion with Dr. Iqbal Ahmed on the subject of " The freedom of the press and the crisis of the state".

Accompanied by party members I attended the forum. Unfortunately, the audience was sparse. An alarming fact considering the seriousness of the crisis.

With such a minimal show of interest, the prospect of an alliance amongst all the different factions of the society seemed very weak. Apparently all those who where not directly affected by this crisis did not think that the dilemma of a newspaper group was their concern.

Initially, like many others, I did not empathize with the situation either, due to the many unanswered questions I had formulated in regard to the group of newspapers how they came into existence, how they dealt with the successive governments, how they projected the wrong ideas of the many corrupt rulers and their coterie.

However, when I learned of the measures adopted by the government in dealing with the Jang group, then, did I feel it obligatory to voice my concerns regarding this issue.

Enough has been said about the technicalities of the tussle between the parties involved.

• Jang group should have been paying their taxes.

• The government should have realized the taxes when they had become due.

• It was up to the tax authorities to have handled the matter according to law.

• Politics should not have influenced the attitude of the tax collectors

• Government should not have pressurized the Jang group on political grounds.

The danger today, however, is not constrained to affecting the freedom of the press, but can lead to a domino effect endangering the independence of all other institutions in our country.

It is understood that those who set up impressive institutions did so after disillusionment with the state, deciding to go their own way, independently from governments and/or political parties. I do not blame them for doing so. Working with political set ups in our country is a very frustrating process, due to either lack of sincerity, education, good political training and competent leadership.

But after all, any substantial social change cannot come about without a political process.

Those independent institutions, while they stand a proof of the good skills of our people, their high abilities for achievements and their commitments, will not be able to survive if not held together by a strong and fair system.

The canvas that is holding all these independent institutions together, the state and its system, is rotting and disappearing. Along with it all these admirable achievements will disappear. Today Jang is only one case in point.

Therefore, presently, the press, the journalists and the columnists should be alarmed, it is a warning to all, and the fight should be the fight for all. Whether it is the Indus valley, or Quaid-e-Azam Law College, whether it is the Agha Khan University or hospital or the OMI hospital, whether it is the Orangi Pilot Project, or even in this matter the Sindh Club. We are all under the threat of closure.

When a government does not implement the orders of the Supreme Court how do we all expect to survive outside the boundaries of law? Through compromises? Even compromise has its limits. Mediocre rulers do not even leave a space for an honorable compromise.

I admire the courage of those lawyers who have taken up the case of the Jang group. In spite of all the odds, they decided to uphold the rule of law at least for the sake of history.

The poor attendance at the Jang forum, is rather a clear indication to the isolated struggle of the different groups that constitute our society.
 
 

Our struggle for justice is divided amongst many groups: the elite, urban and rural, the intellectuals, the journalists, the politicians, the lawyers, the teachers, the doctors, the students, the artists, the government employees, the traders, the industrialists, the peasants, the labourers and their trade unions, women activists, minorities etc…. We are all fighting for justice, however only within our own orbits. While one group is struggling, the other watches as a silent bystander on the periphery.

In this context not only Jang is guilty but all other institutions who have been distancing themselves from the dilemma of the nation and the state as a whole, depriving us all of the potential strength gained from unity.

The victims of this apathy are turning into an unending list of tragedies:

• Bishop John Joseph 's protest against an unjust blasphemy law fell upon deaf ears. He committed suicide.

• The complaints of the two workers of Sindh Road Transport Corporation for non-payments of their salaries went unheard. They committed self-immolation. Allah Bux Boro died.

• The pleas for justice of the sisters of the Tando Bahawal victims went unnoticed. They too, committed self-immolation.

• Chanzeb the worker, who burnt himself alive in front of the Prime Minister's house, did so because he found no compassion for his predicament.

• Even in the Mir Murtaza Bhutto murder case, which united the whole nation under a cloud of grief and protest at the time, became the fight of only those very loyal comrades of the victims.

• Political parties come on the streets and announce black days against excessive use of force by the police, only when the matter concerns their own workers.

The strength of the protest comes only when the majorities take part in it. The majority will partake in protest only when they relate to it as a one.

We must become "all for one and one for all".

*************************************

Go Back