For quite some time the official circles have been showing concern regarding the ever-increasing pension bill and stressing the need to bring it down to a sustainable level. One outcome of this concern has been the introduction of a contributory pension system effective from 1st July 2024. The employees recruited after this date will come under the purview of the new system which is prevalent in most of countries and sounds quite rational in terms of reducing the pension burden on the government and the pensioners getting handsome lump sum amounts on retirement to care for their future needs.
However, in regards to the existing pensioners a discriminatory and callous approach has been adopted with the sole purpose of reducing the expenditure on pensions. A notification issued by the finance ministry recently says that the future annual increase in pension will be 80% of the two-year average of CPI to be announced by the government. In this regard, it is pertinent to point out that the CPI figures announced by the government are never realistic regarding the actual rate of inflation in the country and are invariably kept at single digits. It is usually kept between 6-8 percent to showcase the effectiveness of their economic policies. Now even if we take the average of two years as 8 per cent then 80% of it would be 6%. It means that the pensioners would get a very meager increase while the in-service employees would continue to get increases between 25-35 % which has been the trend during the last five years. It is an extremely discriminatory approach and also contravenes Article 25 of the constitution professing equality of citizens.
The question is if the concern is the increase in expenditure and the need to curtail it then both the serving employees and pensioners may be treated equally by linking the enhancement in their salaries and pensions to CPI. It is pertinent to point out that since independence almost all governments have been observing the principle of equality while giving increases in salaries and pensions. PPP government during 2008-13 stands out in regards to enhancement in the salaries and pensions and treating them both fairly in conformity with norms of social justice and the legal obligations of the ruling government. It is only since the last PML government that a discriminatory approach has been adopted and the trend continues. Even this year while the salaries of the serving employees have been raised by 35% the pensioners were given only a 15% increase. There is a general consensus that during the last two years has been in the vicinity of 43%.
This move by the government also conveniently neglects its obligations under The UN Principles for Older Persons(1991) and the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (2002) which have become obligatory frameworks regarding how the elderly are to be treated. They underscore the need to ensure dignity and also offer blueprints for both developed and developing nations to address the rights and welfare of senior citizens.
No wonder then that the majority of nations and governments ruling the state with the mandate of the people invariably show great respect for their senior citizens and take all possible steps to make their lives comfortable as a token of appreciation for the services that they rendered in the development of their countries. They are extended multiple privileges that reflect the commitment of the nation to look after their welfare in consonance with tenets of social justice. They take pride in their commitment and ability to ensure a productive and dignified life for their aging populations.
The major privilege and state patronage of the senior citizens particularly those who have been government servants during their life, is pension that is given to them to ensure that in their old age they are able to survive with dignity and respect.
It is really difficult to understand the logic behind this unusual callousness. Does the government think that the pensioners are not affected to the same extent by the snow-balling inflation as the serving government employees? Does it think that the pensioners live in a different world where they are immune from the debilitating impact of the unusual increase in the cost of living? Are pensioners the children of the lesser God or second-rate citizens?
The decision of the government has surely antagonized millions of pensioners who constitute a significant proportion of the voters. Pledges and tall claims do not fill the bellies of the people. The hearts and minds of the people cannot be won through hollow slogans. It becomes even more painful when government policies assume the hue of discrimination. The government is better advised to reconsider the issue in the light of the ground realities with a tinge of compassion to avoid negative fallout.
The insensitivity to the plight of pensioners shown by the coalition government led by PML (N) is indeed deplorable. There is no escape from the reality that the economy of Pakistan is in pretty bad shape. There are also no two opinions about the fact that the snow-balling inflation has hit all the segments of society really hard, more so the salaried class and the pensioners. But there is no justification whatsoever to make discriminatory decisions. The government instead of making the lives hard for the pensioners who are the senior citizens should strive to control administrative and other unnecessary expenditures to reduce the burden on the national exchequer. PPP which is a partner in the coalition government standing true to its pro-poor disposition and respect for the pensioners must exert pressure on the government to undo the injustice done to pensioners. The pensions and salaries must increase at the same rate as has been the case during the last seven decades.
In case justice is not done to the pensioners then the Supreme Court must intervene to have the wrong undone. The decision affects millions of pensioners across the country and qualifies as a matter of public interest. The representative body of pensioners must also consider the possibility of filing a petition in the Supreme Court in this regard.
Malik Muhammad Ashraf
The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at ashpak10@gmail.com.