Pakistan s place on the corruption chart of the world

The extent to which corruption has aggravated in Pakistan is reflected by the annual survey report of a Berlin based organization Transparency International. For the year 2006’ the survey of 163, out of a total of 193 countries of the world, reveals Finland, Iceland and New Zealand to be the least corrupt while Haiti is topmost on the corruption list. Pakistan figures at 143rd position i.e. only 20 points short of Haiti. It is a highly disturbing revelation. What does it mean? Is every one in Pakistan guilty of corruption or most of them are corrupt? What percentage of the population indulges in corruption that has put the country so high on the corruption list?

Obviously the entire population cannot be labeled as corrupt. Millions and billions of tenants, labourers, ordinary citizens, shop keepers, the artisans, the poor, the destitute, the beggars can in no way be blamed for pushing the water mark of corruption to such staggering heights. That leaves a very small number of individuals who is responsible for smearing the fair face of the nation with the filth of corruption? Who are those? They must be identified to absolve the rest of the population from the charge of corruption. They are the ones who have the opportunity, ability, power, initiative, means, authority, influence and discretion to indulge in corrupt practices. They live, flourish and function in an environment of corruption. They inhale, eat and drink corruption in collusion with their prototypes from everywhere. For them corruption has taken the form of a culture and a way of living. Each one of them appears to have become loyal member of a corruption club. So much so that if a thief is set to catch a thief he will not disappoint but the maxim of the corrupt is not to betray the fellow corrupt and in turn is seldom  betrayed by any member of his fraternity. So the carnival of dishonest practices, graft, bribery, embezzlement of state funds, misappropriation of zakat and Bait-ul-maal money, fraud, shady dealings, evil ways, immorality, sinfulness, debauchery, rigging of elections, charging a percentage of commission on public contracts worth billions, moral turpitude, vice, wrong doing. Degeneracy, decadence etc all march on hand in hand to scale one height of corruption after another. The corrupt move on with their routine business confidently unmindful of any accountability which is not to be seen anywhere miles around.

The above horrifying scenario is the composite portrayal of the sate of affairs of all government departments put together including Judiciary. What must be fully realized is that dispensation of justice is required to be done by all other departments in the efficient conduct of their own professional affairs. An Officer of revenue department has to be judicious in the assessment of the tax to be charged from the assessed. His empowerment in this case has many dimensions. One: He is at the giving end in an offensive posture. The poor tax-payer has just to sit and wait what the fate has in store for him with his fingers crossed. Two: The Officer may over-assess him where he can extort bribe for showing favours to him. Two: The amount assessed, after due gratification, may be so low that it causes big loss to the exchequer. Three: The Officer has the expertise to make his decision foolproof to disarm the appellate authority to which case might be referred by the state or the frustrated assessed.  Four: The entire operation is marked by the power of discretion that the officer enjoys as per his will and pleasure.

The instance quoted above is representative of every other government department including the Judiciary which functions in its exclusive field related to litigation in civil and criminal matters at the lower level. At upper echelons, in addition, it has to deal with constitutional matters and deal with the petitions lodged against the government. lt has to keep an eye on such government decisions that may in its opinion go against the interes of the state and the people and invalidate them for which it is duly empowered with suo moto discretion by the Constitution. In extra-ordinary circumstances it is required to assess the inevitability of the imposition of state of emergency or an outright declaration of martial law in the country, which it may or may not validate. The question of the independence of Judiciary arises in view of these unusual matters of exclusive nature.

Since the status of independence for the Judiciary cannot be without limits, its quantum, limitations and parameters are in need of a definition. Judiciary is one of the three pillars, the other two being the Legislature and the Executive, upon which the superstructure of the state rests. It is their mutual interaction and cooperation that helps smooth running of the business of governance. They all have to pull in the same direction. Too much of independence beyond a reasonable limit tends to make the Judiciary snobbish. Without a strong sense of responsibility independence becomes chaotic and freelancing. It should in fact mean sincere and all time support and cooperation of the Judiciary to the government in power.