IT was a Rs 211 billion question. But as the Pakistan army cracked down on the leading lights of the Pakistan People's Party and the Pakistan Muslim League, in midnight raids and threw them into the slammer, some for the first time, all that it could recover was a paltry Rs 8 billion. "Peanuts," as General Zia-ul-Haq would have said.
In reality, Chief Executive Pervez Musharraf, by setting Rs 211 billion as the target of recovery, has shot himself in the foot. Economists say the principal defaulted is around Rs 90 billion; the rest is compound interest. Of this Rs 40 billion is unrecoverable, so in real terms the target is Rs 50 billion, of which Rs 8 billion has been recovered, and the coming weeks might see another billion. To repeatedly announce the recovery of Rs 211 billion was bad propaganda.
"Musharraf's won the first round. People are rejoicing to see these crooks who'd strut around on our money being nabbed by the law. We hope the jailor throws away the keys," is how one common Pakistani reacted the morning after. For, it's the first time in the last 52 years that anyone has made an attempt for an across-the-board accountability and succeeded in at least identifying and arresting crooks. Who, besides politicians from every political party except Imran Khan's Tehreek-e-Insaf, include the likes of former vice air marshal, Waqar Azim, and a former admiral, Mansoorul Haq. Many took malicious delight when Benazir Bhutto was proclaimed offender and some of her top leaders as fugitives from law. All of whom now stand to serve a 14-year jail term and debarment from holding public office for 21 years.
And it's not only the common man but even an eminent US scholar like Prof Lawrence Ziring who feels the Pakistan army can deliver. "Pakistanis have made the army the instrument of their immediate salvation and although the men in uniform may lack the background for governance, they alone have the power and the leverage to set the course for the new millennium," he wrote recently. To ensure that the arrested find no loopholes as they did before, a new accountability law has been proclaimed through a presidential ordinance. For the first time the new law will be applied on members of the armed forces including those who have resigned, retired or been discharged or dismissed. Possession of unaccounted-for assets has also been made an offence of absolute liability.
A few, however, question the cut-off date from where Musharraf starts his process of accountability. "Lucky are those who made their billions before '85 since they aren't included in the present process of law," says one cynic, alluding to the billions the armed forces made during martial law, including funds from the Afghan War. Some also point to the lack of transparency that stems from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) being governed by a sitting general. A non-government person, wrote the English daily, The News, "would have given it (NAB) continuity and, crucially, isolated the government from the accountability process to save both from any controversy. As it is, the Muslim League, the likely focus of nab for having been in power - can complain of victimisation." Observes an independent economist: "This whole exercise is the work of a schoolboy's mind. When you go for such massive corruption you do not go by the book. You have to first establish justice before taking any further steps." Interestingly, no member of the judiciary has been included in the defaulters' list. "We know our courts. Soon many of these defaulters will start to get relief and the generals will have no other choice but to impose martial law," says former general Hamid Gul.
Musharraf's talk of transparency, thus, seems to be empty. Journalists are being denied access to ministries run by the general's nominees and all calls to the director-general, military operations, even on routine matters go unreturned. The ISPR, finding itself one of the most sought after institutions, plays hard to get.
Caught between appeasing the West and cracking the whip at home, many see Musharraf on slippery ground. Says commentator M.B. Naqvi: "It would seem people should, instead of demanding the accountability of present or failed rulers, ask for participation in decision-making and in the execution of policies evolved through a democratic consultative process. Even elected governments have done what they wanted without referring to the common man while openly authoritarian regimes have thrown them virtually on the dust heap. Who's at fault? That should be answered before deciding on what should be done." For, eventually as the dust settles down, people will begin asking, "what's in it for me?" And no general's been able to answer the question yet.
