The many hands that clapped

Since that day in October 2007 when the National Reconciliation Ordinance was unleashed upon this country it has been a rotten bone of contention with a ste-nch to it that reaches up into the high heavens. Its very title is misleading, as it never had anything to do with 'reconciliation, a fact recently seemingly recognised by the Supreme Court of Pak-istan by some of those attempting to interpret its most honourable judgment. There is nothing to it that is reconcilable. The country, or nation, was not involved. How could it have been possible to ask the nation to reconcile itself to the robbing of its exchequer, the negation of its prevailing laws, and the roughshod riding over its constitution by a combination of military and civilian politicians? By some it has been equated to the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, a gross insult to this latter in which truth (unknown in this Republic) was a major factor in the reconciliation process. The ordinance was a denial of natural justice and the sole truth involved was the admission that, yes, crimes had been committed. The NRO may now be dead, slain by the apex court, but it is not gone. It is very mu-ch with us as the court orders have yet to be obeyed by a government which wisely cho-se not to defend the indefensible, but also has no desire to right the wrong done. It will not go away until what passes for a government in this country pulls itself together and decides how it intends to bow to the judicial orders. It cannot just go to sleep on the matter, which it seems now be attempting to do. Calls have been made for the maker and promulgator of the NRO to be punished lawfully for having done that which is unlawful. Who was the maker? President General Pervez Musharraf was only one of the many makers. In the NRO case it did not take two hands to clap, it took several. The main beneficiaries were Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto, the condoning of the alleged sins of the latter allowing the former to prolong his presidency. Thus both were equally guilty, as is now the man who later accepted it, to whom it was handed down accidentally and then allowed him to ascend to the position of head of state. But there are many others who must share the guilt, those involved in its making, the various 'fixers who acted in their own interests as to how Pakistan should be sorted out. Who will take to task the representatives of the US and British gover-nments, who facilitated the 'deal, or the Pakistani negotiators and the then 'advisor to Benazir now President Asif Zard-aris interior minister? There are others who negotiated, and thousands who have benefited. How will all these people be brought to book for their transgression of a countrys constitution and laws? The detailed reasoning for the December 12, 2009 Supreme Court short order has come in for much criticism, one being that it is Zardari specific. Since he happens to now be the main beneficiary that may well be so. The other 8,000 'odd who have gained advantage from the ordinance have only done so because presumably the drafters thought that in all fairness it could not be Benazir alone who was favoured. To attempt to make it acceptable in the eyes of the nation arbitrary dates were chosen between which alleged murderers, crooks, robbers and assorted law-breakers would be forgiven their transgressions - and of course all in the larger national interest which in this case coincided with the interests of the western powers who 'own Pakistan, thanks to its hopelessness when it comes to governance or the management of its assets. One other criticism is that the Supreme Court has largely dwelt upon amendments to the 1973 constitution which should have been long ago done away with by the so-called democratic governments that have come and gone, amendments made way back at the end of the 1980s by a military dictator who manipulated religion for his own ends. The court has also mooted, in between citing religious tracts and even fairy tales, that the money robbed from the nation and stashed away abroad could be brought back citing other countries which have also suffered crooks and criminals in their political scenarios. This is so unlikely as to be merely wishful thinking. What has gone has gone and has been swallowed up by our rapacious politicians and administrators - and the murdered dead will remain dead. The court has done what it had to do - there was no alternative. But the end game is that the alleged wrongs have not been, and cannot be, righted. The mills of God grind in a strange manner. The NRO did no good for its main beneficiaries. For them, it was the unluckiest piece of legislation. Benazir Bhutto was assassinated before she could take from it the slightest benefit, and Pervez Musharraf was ousted within a year from a presidential seat he had planned to occupy for five years. Asif Zardari and his NRO companions are now caught up in a sordid web, transformed by a legal decision into political zombies, the democratically elected government is in a flat spin pondering upon how to extricate itself and its many involved minions, and the nation cries out for justice seen to be done. The writer is a freelance columnist. Email: jilani.amina@gmail.com