Corruption, we are led to believe, is a political crime which is precisely why it is increasingly associated with politicians. The fact that politicians in power use it as a tool to victimise their opponents in no way detracts from public perception that corruption did take place - a view further strengthened by the protection from investigation and prosecution extended to the ruling elite as well as coalition partners.
The PPP cry that generals and bureaucrats are equally if not more engaged in corruption is very credible however to investigate and charge individuals is the domain of the Ministry of Interior, under civilian control, and its failure to proactively take any steps to charge any individual in the military or in the bureaucracy for the past three years, within the domain of the Ministry of Law, rests with the party.
The Interior Ministry has been engaged in quite the contrary activity during the past three years, if the Supreme Court judgements are anything to go by: protecting politicians against whom the Supreme Court took suo motu notice or if a case was registered against them by a private citizen. The strategy employed by the government has been fairly simple and if recent events are anything to go by fairly effective: use all the legal tools available to drag each and every case, tools that include transfer/promotion/reappointment of those bureaucrats who were successfully ferreting out damning evidence that would have led to a guilty verdict.
Significantly not all bureaucrats who come under the Minister of Interior, notably the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), or under the Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), are implementing the judgements of the Supreme Court - these the government is promoting or assigning key positions to. The question is if this state of affairs is unique to the PPP government, led by President Asif Ali Zardari or whether it is in consonance with the actions of past governments - be they led by the military or by other parties including the PML (N).
The PPP government notes a historically verifiable event to counterattack charges of its numerous violations of the superior courts' verdicts: the Supreme Court was under physical attack by PML (N) stalwarts on November 28, 1997 when Nawaz Sharif was the Prime Minister of the country. By 2000, when Musharraf ensconced himself in power, the Supreme Court awarded one month imprisonment and 5,000 rupee fine to seven PML stalwarts. In case of non-payment of fine, the verdict noted, they would have to undergo one month additional imprisonment. Those awarded punishments were Tariq Aziz, Akhtar Rasool, Mian Munir, Chaudhry Muhammad Tanvir (already in prison), Akhter Mehmood, Shahbaz Goshi and Sardar Naseem.
Transparency International has, according to informed sources, estimated corruption at over 3 trillion rupees, in just over three years of PPP rule - a report that the government has, allegedly, so far succeeded in suppressing. This amount is staggering and the corruption associated with cases currently being heard in the Supreme Court would pale into insignificance if the 3 trillion rupee figure is accurate. Be that as it may the PPP, unlike the PML (N) in 1997, did not storm the Supreme Court building and its more than a dozen violations are in terms of failure to implement the court verdicts which include the following: (i) the National Reconciliation Ordinance judgement directing the government to send a letter to the Swiss courts to reopen the cases with around 60 million dollars involved; (ii) the 22 billion rupee corruption in the Pakistan Steel Mills associated with a close friend of President Zardari in which the Interior Minister was issued a contempt notice but it was not pursued by the court and the matter remains pending, (iii) the Hajj scandal and the NICL case where foot-dragging by investigative officers and transfer of those who were proactively engaged in investigations has been the norm; and (iv) appointments that have been challenged in court as not based on merit or as per rules and regulations.
The outcome: higher outlay on loss-making units attributed to corruption that is a direct contributory to a higher budget deficit which, in turn, accounts for higher inflationary pressures.
The present government has consistently allowed political considerations to prevail over economic considerations. This has not only implied protecting the corrupt through foot-dragging in terms of investigating and prosecuting the corrupt, but also in terms of removal of subsidies for the power sector as advised by the international financial institutions (IFIs). Many would approve of targeted subsidies and it is relevant to note that the International Monetary Fund, as well as other IFIs, have supported the government's efforts to target subsidies as well as the social security programme titled the Benazir Income Support Programme with one proviso: that the allocations/subsidies be targeted and not partisan or used by the rich. Continuous charges of partisanship with respect to the BISP remain, though the World Bank's insistence on a score card system may remove the kinks in time.
The government is also accused of expenditure priorities that are not supportable from the context of rising poverty, due to high inflationary pressures in the country. Defence and current expenditures were raised by around 51 billion rupees (in comparison to revised estimates of last year) and 19 billion rupees respectively. In contrast, allocation for Water and Power division under the PSDP was 36 billion rupees for 2011-12 - double what it actually received in 2010-11 (17 billion rupees) as opposed to what it was earmarked in the budget 2010-11 (28 billion rupees). This amount is inadequate to meet the needs of the country and as the nation has been told load shedding would continue this year. By far, the biggest increase in allocation was earmarked for the Planning and Development Division, from 5 billion in the revised estimates for last year to 32 billion rupees in the current fiscal year followed by Information and Broadcasting division to 630 million rupees from last year's revised estimates of 260 million rupees.
And finally, the government failed to increase revenue generation. The Federal Board of Revenue's initially robust figures for 2010-11 that were over-estimated by 38 billion rupees (a paltry sum in the context of corruption) led to the loss of credibility of the Finance Ministry with donor agencies.
There is an urgent need to tackle corruption and co-operation with the courts in terms of appointing honest bureaucrats to head investigations is the way forward: that this government has been unwilling to do, so far, at least. Additionally, the accountability bill needs to be agreed and passed in the assembly. That, too, the present government has been unwilling to do, a view based on the few times the country's Law Minister bothered to attend the relevant meetings. The outcome of this lack of action has ranged from increasingly harsh aid conditions to fewer disbursements of pledged assistance to a Pakistani populace continuing to proactively engage in tax evasion.
At this point, the people of the country are looking to the courts to tackle corruption. The government convinced that the people would continue to vote tribally (baradari) has given little or no attention to the general perception of rising corruption. Unfortunately, for the PPP high command to change its view on tackling corruption, the voting patterns of the electorate have to change. That, at present, remains the issue.