In the aftermath of the ‘Panama Leaks’, Prime Minister of Pakistan has ordered to set up a Judicial Commission to probe whether any illegality was committed to acquire billions of dollars of assets by his family and parking these funds in offshore accounts. Apparently. There is nothing illegal in operating an offshore firm and holding financial assets in offshore accounts. The super rich around the world use these vehicles for a host of reasons.

However, a highly sophisticated institution having capability of dealings with organized financial crimes alone would be able to determine the legality or otherwise of origin of these funds. Certainly, a former or sitting judge ought not to be an expert in financial crimes nor possess the institutional backing required to deal with such probe. Another aspect of the matter would be beyond legality – the moral aspect which would be beyond the jurisdiction of such commission.

Let us assume the Prime Minister and his family did not commit any illegality. Let us assume that the massive wealth acquired by them is declared legal by the Judicial Commission. Would such finding satisfy the millions living below the poverty line in Pakistan? The answer is a definite No.

‘Panama Leaks’ has exposed an ugly aspect of capitalism. The answer for which is not legality or otherwise. The question it has raised is about morality. It has put a big question mark on the manner in which wealth is acquired and retained, by those who hold power. The laws regulating the financial system are under question.

The wealth creation and distribution in a capitalist society are unjust and immoral. In countries like Pakistan the capital creation machine is more dishonorable for the less fortunate. Most of them inherit hunger and leave the same for their heirs. There is not any right way for them to break the chains of poverty. Prime Minister’s family have to explain the science behind acquiring massive assets to people of Pakistan. This has to be above the legal debate – purely on moral grounds.

The debate over ‘Panama Leaks’ should not target Sharif’s family alone. It should go beyond. The ones who acquired assets by serving imperial British interests should also prove the legitimacy of retaining these assets. Those hoarding real estate and snatching away the right of the roof from millions, should justify their wealth. The moral aspect of the profits from private health and education businesses should be scrutinized. The prayer leaders and peers should also explain to people the miracles which made them billionaires. At the same time, judiciary and executive have to prove the legitimacy of wage disparity in these institutions. Last, but not the least, industrialists should explain morality of business cartels and inflated profits. And the poor should question themselves: who keeps them poor?

Inequality is not the issue here. The problem to solve is more about equal opportunities – guaranteed by the Constitution. Certain level of inequality would be acceptable if there is fair access to opportunities. Youth holding doctorate in business administration from top university of the world is allowed to question the capabilities and opportunities enjoyed by children of the privileged. According to Toyama, a UC Berkeley researcher, "Morality, on some level, is the avoidance of suffering; or at least the decrease of suffering”. Any law or financial regulation which increases human sufferings is immoral and oppressive.

The very capital regulatory structure is designed to protect the interests of rich and powerful and exploit weak and vulnerable. Can the same be used as a yardstick to prove the legality of wealth accumulation by powerful? We do not need judicial commissions determining the legality of wealth accumulation. We need truth and reconciliation commission, to gauge the morality and legitimacy of wealth accumulation. The commission should redefine the legality for the creation of capital and the mechanism to regulate the distribution of wealth. It should ascertain the discrimination opportunities, which helped the Prime Minister’s family in the accumulation of wealth. If the same opportunities are not available to children of a farmer or labourer, the wealth is definitely illegitimate.

The sufferings of millions, the moral values and role of state as facilitator for underprivileged, should be the guiding principles for legislation. A state with the mass unemployment, high income disparity, poverty and lack of access to basic needs, has to look into causes. The failure of the existing order is perceptible and anarchy is touching the borders of civil war. If the regulatory mechanism was delivering, we would have not been on the verge of collapse. The wiser thing would be to look beyond the existing order and reinvent the laws which benefit the larger part of society.

According to Foreign Policy Magazine “the Panama Paper confirms that the world’s elite cheat, lie, and steal”. The legal, judicial and financial regulatory structure which failed to prevent this massive stealing needs to be replaced. The probe into the legality or otherwise would be a futile exercise. The better option would be to set up a commission comprising of labourers, farmers, unemployed youth and university professors to suggest a mechanism for fair distribution of wealth and equal opportunities for all – as guaranteed by the Coonstitution.