Nawal Amjad |
The Panama Case has ‘seemed’ to have been the most straightforward of all cases, but just in the words of a very renowned journalist Umar Cheema: ‘’It may be a straightforward case, but not a simple one’’. Umar Cheema’s very line has literally been taken as a guiding light by the actors I referred to in the title. They never really looked at it as a simple case. Probably never.
The tale of the Mayfair Apartments and the will or rather (confusion): to be or not to be – the beneficial owners were not supposed to have come across a lot of twists and turns and the Mavericks and theatrics changing every single day. Much to the surprise of the foes and saviors, things changed more frequently than anyone ever imagined. Everything happened from a Victim-Card used by Maryam Nawaz to the Government’s also-known-as (Sharif Clan’s spokespersons) equating the daughter of today’s Prime Minister to the one they now very ‘graciously’ recognize as the Daughter of Democracy – Benazir Bhutto.
The PM in trouble today, on one hand, accepts his daughter to have been as great as his once-arch rival: Benazir Bhutto and on the other hand, also seen intensifying his bond with Ijaz-ul-Haq, son of ‘Martyr’ Zia-ul-Haq, as Sharif loves commemorating it as.
The same Benazir Bhutto, whose father was when judicially murdered by General Zia-ul-Haq, so today’s Prime Minister was the first enthusiast to have celebrated Zia’s victory and the same Benazir Bhutto against whom Nawaz Sharif was confident that ‘’Martyr’’ Zia’s efforts would bear fruits.
The PM who is in trouble today, on one hand, accepts his daughter to have been as great as his once-arch rival: Benazir Bhutto and on the other hand, also seen intensifying his bond with Ijaz-ul-Haq, son of ‘Martyr’ Zia-ul-Haq, as Sharif loves commemorating it as. Putting aside the history book at the moment and fast-forwarding everything, there’s the JIT Report and the Supreme Court’s all head on. The same Supreme Court, the same questions. The same power to disqualify Prime Ministers; the same Constitutionality to consider JITs, whatever way, and whenever. The same Authority to turn the ever-turning tables. The same Platform to serve Justice from.
Of intrigues and cherry picking
The irony is: What’s the Dilemma then? The One who took the charge before has been in charge and still is, so what’s the chaos and why? Is the chaos so intense and the ‘System’ in danger because the Foes have yet again become the Saviors, and the Saviors – the Foes? Or is there more to it or nothing at all…
The Sharif family and the henchmen have derided the JIT but have not countered any chunks of the report. The army of ministers and other supporters of the “system” have staunchly advocated Nawaz’s cause; they have again brought up the military bogey into the scheme of things.
A country, where Prime Ministers are proudly hanged, party loyalties changed more easily than clothes and cases heard more religiously in talk shows than in real courts, this tumult shouldn’t seem so unusual to us. When those Leaguians (hint to Q-League) who always take harbor under the System’s ‘saving agenda’, try to save democracy…You and I know: there’s something seriously wrong for sure!
The question again arises: ‘’Do we have a choice?’’ May be and very disapprovingly ‘’yes’’.The choice to look into the Panamagate is as straightforward, but again not as simple as the matter itself. The so-called stakeholders and custodians of accountability and democracy have probably forgotten and forgiven the fact that if it were a political case, then how can it have a legal conclusion?
And then there’s Pakistan People’s Party which adds to both the tension and suspicion, a little more. The Opposition Leader (Parliament’s lower-house only) Khursheed Shah accepted that there was a desperate need to ‘Save’ the ‘System’ in 2014 and so PPP did, but this time it isn’t the case and if so, the alleged PM should enlighten them.
But if in their very note-worthy disapproval, it isn’t so and the case has been legal and only legal in nature, then what’s the worry to do with? The Chants of ‘’PM Imran’’ ‘’PM Imran’’: why so mandatory? Imran founded the movement with the apparent intention to ‘Uphold’ the System with the Strength of Justice and Law prevailing over and above everything and with the core objective to free Pakistan of a menace like Corruption, so why ‘Upholding’ the System all of a sudden changed into a ‘Saving The System’ movement? This has become even more pertinent a question because the Flag-bearers of ‘’Save the State, not the Politics’’ have also joined in the ‘Saving’ movement or were ‘they’ the movement already? Why is it that the DG ISPR had to vindicate the military’s neutrality in the issue? Why does our ‘System’ all of a sudden tremble so much so that the ‘Saviors’ of the borders have to reassure every time that the System’s safe and the Politics safer when in actuality, they are quite vehemently dragged into politics and then their credibility and that of the system questioned?
And then there’s Pakistan People’s Party which adds to both the tension and suspicion, a little more. The Opposition Leader (Parliament’s lower-house only) Khursheed Shah accepted that there was a desperate need to ‘Save’ the ‘System’ in 2014 and so PPP did, but this time it isn’t the case and if so, the alleged PM should enlighten them.Last time it was just the ‘Umpire’s finger’; however, this time the Umpire’s all present, so may be more straightforward in that sense, but nevertheless simple.
Read more: Narratives galore on the Panama saga
The lynchpin of the matter is neither the PM, nor his family, but as to whether who exactly are the ‘’Lohay key Chanay’’ and for whom? The Panamagate may seem a matter of Sharifs to some; of the PM to others, but more than anything else, this matter is less of individuals and more of the System itself. But do toddler democracies like us digest this change of individuals and frequent ‘Savings’ of the System, when in actual, these savings descend the system more than ascending it? Even for a second, if it is believed that the system shall ascend so the question arises: with what and whose legitimacy?
Or is the System more legitimate than anything, anyone?
Whatever, regardless of the curiosity as to who shall raise the curtain and who shall bring it down, a curtain still exists.
Nawal Amjad is a student of Politics and International Relations at the University of London International Program. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Global Village Space’s editorial policy.