No dreams to live by
Anwar Ahmad
Last week, comment on the government-Jang Group war was deliberately avoided. Primarily, because best defence of what the Jang Group stood for ought to have come from the outside--particularly, from other media groups. Barring honourable exceptions, that has been a disappointment (true to the past pattern of sycophancy and opportunism, reminds the respected journalist-historian Mr Zamir Niazi).
Also, the war was being fought so viciously--and, obviously, for very high stakes--that one could not be entirely sure of the facts. With so much mud being thrown around, how was one to sift the truth from half-truths? Not to forget outright slander, of which there must surely be a fair proportion. There was, thus, the apprehension of becoming an unwitting tool in unknown hands.
Finally, the matter had gone to the Supreme Court. It was hoped that the honourable court would put an immediate stop to the madness and, then, sit back to untangle the morality from the legality. As the facts unfolded in court, one could also sift villains from victims and attempt to apportion blame and vindication. That, unfortunately, did not happen. The battle only became nastier.
The Supreme Court ordered the release of some newsprint to the beleaguered Jang Group. But the conditions attached to this limited relief were interpreted to death by the authorities. Eventually, as the papers rapidly shrivelled up, the Supreme Court unconditionally released a further reduced quantity of newsprint--just enough to let the papers breathe till the next date of hearing.
The courtroom wrangling over how many pages were being printed by the papers when the matter came to court was, truly, astounding. That, ultimately, was settled as the criterion for the limited release of the precious newsprint. It seemed surreal.
Whatever the charges against the Jang Group, these were only one side of the story. Even if all these were presumed to be true, nothing had yet been proven in a criminal court or a tax tribunal. So why had its papers suddenly lost the right to exist? Even partially so? Why couldn't they conduct free and unfettered business until an order to the contrary by a court? No one has cared to explain this to bewildered readers.
The motives for its sudden activity notwithstanding, the government alleges that the Jang Group has tax arrears to pay. Going by our corrupt corporate culture, this may be true. The government put the recoverable amount at a whopping Rs2 billion (though, like the length of the angler's catch, PTV adds to it with each fresh rendition). This should make the Group one of the largest, and most easily taxable, sources of revenue--a taxman's equal of the goose that lays the golden egg.
Would killing it make any sense--particularly, at a time of economic depression, increasing unemployment and desperation leading to suicides? Wouldn't it be more sensible to let it thrive to provide more employment, and yield more taxes?
There obviously is more to the matter than meets the eye, wheels within wheels. The government has, basically accused the Group of false reporting. While news and views cannot be controlled even in a quasi-democracy, false reporting can, and must, be. But for this, there are libel laws and the charges must go to court. If the laws are toothless--and they are--parliament must put more teeth in them. Instead, if the government becomes the judge, the jury and the executioner, what should libelled individuals do? Shoot the reporter?
That is why, the pervasive and logical view has been that tax matters be separated from whatever else the government has against the Group. Each charge should, then, go to the relevant court. There is no question even of seeking a conciliation--neither tax-recovery nor the freedom of press leave room for any such manoeuvre. Any secret deal, on either issue, will shred the high morality in which both sides have clothed their contentions.
The tax evasion charges, particularly, must be pursued with a vengeance. No matter what the government's motive, let a precedent be set which can, tomorrow, be followed for other mega-empires built on stolen taxes. But, this pursuit would only be credible and in the national interest if it were transparent and within the law.
That, unfortunately, has not happened. With the impartiality even of the tax 'judge's father' thrown open to question, like the PPP, the Jang Group is set to become a symbol of persecution. At the moment, it seems down; though not yet out. And remember, that this is not a knife-melon mismatch. Jang is a powerful Group, with public reach, wide political support and even international linkages. What would an individual, who incurs the government's wrath, amount to? Yet, we are a democracy with a Constitution full of equal rights.
The most frightening aspect of this saga is the amazing ease with which the Jang Group publications are being strangulated. Their going to the Supreme Court made no difference to the policemen besieging their offices. All the hue and cry in parliament did not deter officials from spiriting away the life-sustaining newsprint. All the cacophony by political parties did not save protesting journalists from being bashed up. Was this the light at the end of the long dark tunnel of martial law?
Even the newspaper hawkers got into the act. They throw over the fence the last paper on earth you would wish to spoil your breakfast with, and peddle away faster than anyone can catch them. The damning result of this seemingly trivial link in the invidious chain of disruption is that not only is the freedom of writing and printing being violated, but readers are also being denied the right to read what they prefer. Instead, they are being forced to choose between a selected fare.
In a martial law this was a natural occurrence. The felony here is compounded because this momentous event is occurring--with such unbelievable ease--in a democracy, with all its paraphernalia intact.
The critical factor could be that people on the street appear unconcerned. Is that what the government is counting on? Give them the military courts, hang a few to bring order on the streets, and see who cares about freedom of the press. After the Jang Group, Lahore rule would seem complete. In the short term, this may make sense. In the long term, aren't we all supposed to be dead?
We have, unfortunately, been brought to a sorry stage where the sheer force of adverse circumstances has put many ideals on the chopping block. The pursuit of democracy and civilised conduct being the foremost. Many otherwise sensible and sensitive people now seem driven to compromising with the desperate reality. They want peace now, no matter how it comes. The immediate has become so threatening, so unbearable, that the distant matters not.
So superficial, so physical, has our collective existence become that the sublime and the spiritual seem stupid. Is it time to say goodbye to dreams? To live, like our rulers, a life without any higher purpose in it?