Aitzaz Ahsan is no run-of-the-mill lawyer-cum-politician. He is among those enlightened and intellectual types who seldom survive in the murky waters of Pakistani politics. Yet, Aitzaz Ahsan managed to make a mark for himself and enjoy a little taste of power – thanks to the pragmatic streak in him which goes hand-in-hand with his idealistic self. Time and age appear to have mellowed him down a little, but his candid remarks and statements still carry the spark and the punch for which Aitzaz Ahsan is loved and respected by many.
He has been a Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) man all through his political career, barring a brief period when he jumped ship and joined the Tehreek-e-Istaqlal of Air Marshal (retired) Asghar Khan. But he was soon back in the PPP fold, earning the distinction of remaining associated with three generations of Bhuttos – from Zulfikar and Benazir to Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari.
In recent years, however, one sees him often drifting away from the party-line. For example, even if his party remains on a reconciliation path with its one-time nemesis – the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) — Aitzaz Ahsan still could throw some heavy punches at Sharifs. Yet, Aitzaz was the one who pleaded the case of Nawaz Sharif as a defence lawyer when he was ousted from power by General Pervez Musharraf in October 1999.
During the controversial lawyers’ movement against General Musharraf, Aitzaz Ahsan was in the forefront and considered responsible for forcing Benazir Bhutto to return to the country earlier than planned.
Born in Murree on Sept 27, 1945, Ahsan had been the member of both the houses of the parliament – the National Assembly and the Senate – as well as the Punjab provincial assembly in a political career spanning well over five decades now. He had also been a provincial minister in the 1970s and served as a federal minister in both the first and second term of Benazir Bhutto.
Extracts of Aitzaz Ahsan’s interview with Bol News.
Will the Opposition’s planned no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran succeed in which former president Asif Ali Zardari appears to be playing an active role?
Aitzaz Ahsan (AA): In Pakistan you can predict nothing but the past. So, those making forecasts like Sheikh Rashid Ahmed that there will be sacrifices before the Eidul Azha or the PML-N’s Mussadiq Malik, who is equating the government’s future with a flying kite, should know that Pakistan’s politics and people often defy predictions.
One may be thinking that someone is on the retreat or just about to fall, but no one knows that within days, he or she might make a stronger comeback.
You mentioned that Zardari is actively involved in the process of ensuring a no confidence motion against the PM. Had the PDM agreed to his suggestions in the past, it would have been better for this alliance. But the PDM leaders were being arrogant at that time and didn’t pay heed to his suggestions. The differences (between the PPP and the PML-N) are still there and we are not completely on the same page as yet. In our opinion a vote of no confidence motion should be presented in the province first (Punjab) to weaken the PM and later at the Centre. It is an important proposition which we will try to understand further once we sit down next. In politics, you first destroy the outer forts and then attack the centre. But the PDM is in a terrible hurry to celebrate the toppling of Imran Khan’s government. At times, they say that it is a do or die date for them, and then they give another date to present the motion. So, no one in the PDM is sure about things.
Some of the PDM’s prominent leaders — not the ones who belong to the abusive-language brigade – believe that the umpire’s finger will be up soon, meaning that the establishment will not be backing the Imran Khan government anymore. Even Maulana Fazlur Rehman and Shahid Khaqan Abbas are convinced that the establishment is not supporting Imran Khan anymore, while Rana Sanaullah recently claimed that the day the state of Pakistan gives us a green signal, we will bring the no confidence motion. This means that they are just waiting for the establishment’s orders and don’t have a strategy of their own.
But if someone does have the strategy to oust Imran Khan, it is the PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. You must keep an eye on him. He is the only one who is intelligent and cool enough to take things further in a decent manner. Though he delivers hard hitting speeches in jalsas, on the floor of the house he is articulate and composed. He coined this term ’Prime Minister-select’ in one of his speeches and even Imran Khan applauded it at that time.
The vote of no confidence could happen if all the opposition parties are on one page and they get the support of some outer forces too, on whom Maulana Fazlur Rehman and the PML-N openly depend. But not the PPP. We don’t say that we take directions from someone or follow them. If Asif Zardari and the PML-N come closer and develop an understanding on the same issue, it would be in the benefit of the country and the masses.
Have the internal differences among the opposition parties been sorted out?
AA: I have absolutely no trust in the PML-N, because at the last moment they either change colours or follow someone’s direction or accuse some quarters of leaving them high and dry. Therefore, I am always worried for my party whenever it gets close to the PML-N because all of their leaders play a different tune every time.
When did the PML-N last change their stance?
AA: Well, they used to ask us not to vote for the Army chief’s extension. But they themselves supported it in the end. Also, they never solidly speak about any issue. Recently, Maryam Aurangzeb issued a vague statement that the man who had left for Peshawar is involved in suspicious activities, but he should be mindful that she might take his name. That is not the way. They should take clear names if someone is involved in anti-state activities. This modus operandi of the PML-N and their vague terminologies such as khalai makhlooq, undaikhe hath, mujhe kyun nikala, kaun pichay hai jo dori hilata hai are quite annoying. I feel awkward about all this and also worried for my party, because in my opinion a majority of the PML-N’s leaders’ shelf lives have expired. If anyone is relevant in today’s politics and has a future, it is only Bilawal. He has the energy and maturity that has impressed everyone in the political circles. And if he has the advice of Asif Zardari, what more can you ask for.
Will the votes of the PTI’s would-be defectors counted at the time of vote of no-confidence in the provincial or the National assemblies? How will the ECP look at this?
AA: Vote will be counted. Previously, if there was a forward bloc or a minority group, the votes were not counted. But now it is not the case as those votes are counted now. However, they will lose their memberships of the parliament on three grounds if an MNA or MPA vote against the parties’ decision. First, in the election of the prime minister or chief minister. Second, in any constitutional amendment and thirdly in the budget.
In this backdrop, if an MNA or MPA belongs to the PTI and votes against the party decision, he or she will lose the seat. They might have dethroned Imran Khan but it is the requirement of the constitution that after the decision is made on the motion or any other move, he or she will seize to remain a member of the parliament. They can then file a reference to the Chief Election Commissioner who will make the decision on their status.
Do you think Nawaz Sharif will return before the next elections?
AA: No, I don’t think this incompetent government could bring back the PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif nor he is likely to return on his own.
What is your take on the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) Amendment Ordinance that the government intends to bring in? Who and what will ascertain fake news?
AA: In my opinion if the PECA amendment is deeply looked into, it seems that even the government is not aware of what it is about and what they want to achieve or mean by these amendments. I haven’t seen anyone from the government’s side who has explained it in a decent or effective manner. The new ordinance for the amendments in the cybercrime law is valid and also a necessity to some extent, but it could be misused if not rightly exercised.
Let me share the reason for that with you. The government is so incompetent that it does not know the real objective of the new law. If the government wants to implement it on every journalist, anchor, reporter or talk show host, then it is definitely an ugly move and could be termed as draconian. The journalists should be given protection against human error in their professional work. However, the fact is that while the purpose of the law is to control fabricated (fake) news, the government has no idea or criterion to differentiate the fake news from an error. First you must understand what fake news or fabricated news is. Let me tell you what fake news is; you may recall the claims of PML-N leader Maryam Nawaz that she possessed some videos which could prove her innocence as well as of her father and ex-PM Nawaz Sharif. That was the real fake news. The second fake news was the affidavit of Rana Shamim, the former chief justice of Gilgit Baltistan. Besides that, leaking of a ‘fake’ audio of former chief justice Saqib Nisar and ‘bogus’ medical reports of Nawaz Sharif also fall under the definition of fake news.
Maryam Bibi also claimed that she has many ‘evidences’ and ‘audio tapes’ and if she is provoked, she would take the names of many people for their unscrupulous behaviour. Now our judiciary or the judges did not have the courage to ask Maryam to present those tapes or so called ‘evidences’ which could allegedly expose some of the generals, judges, bureaucrats or parliamentarians. That all was fake news and those were fake claims. On the other hand, the allegations of corruption on the Sharif family, if not proved in the courts, could not be called fake news but incorrect news.
The way you are defining fake news could be true, but this is your interpretation. The government or the FIA may see it differently.
AA: If the government doesn’t define fake news, as I am defining it, then it is definitely draconian. If for example it is being applied on reporter Hassan Naqvi but not being applied on Maryam Nawaz then it is definitely draconian, misinterpretation and flawed law. But there should be a law which can give courage to the judges to call things as ‘fake’ if they are fake, such as fake affidavits, fake videos which may be used to set a criminal free or save him or her from a penalty. I call this fake. But every news which is wrong cannot be termed as fake, that would put extra pressure on journalists and that will affect the fundamental right of freedom of expression.
There is another ordinance which says the prime minister, the MNAs and MPAs cannot conduct election campaigns. How valid is that?
AA: Well, then who else will run the election campaigns? it is being done across the globe in each and every constituency, whether it is George Bush, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton or whether it is Benazir Bhutto Shaheed, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Shaheed or Nawaz Sharif. All of them used to do election jalsas and even their opponents used to lead election campaigns. I can understand that the election commission made this rule for the by-polls and also punished some MNAs and ministers belonging to KP. For by-polls, it could be said that the ordinance was made in order to provide a level-playing field because the government ministers could be contesting against lesser-known candidates or newcomers. But in general elections, there is no prime minister or minister and there is a caretaker setup and independent judiciary in place which is neutrally observing the entire process.
The campaign would have to be run by former ministers or prime ministers. If the PPP has to run its campaign it would be run by Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. It is important for him to go in each constituency to make an impact. Likewise, Nawaz Sharif, Shehbaz Sharif and Imran Khan will run their own campaigns. I fail to understand this rule, but they could definitely say that laws should be made through ordinance.
What’s this debate about the presidential form of government?
AA: Let me tell you categorically that even the parliament could not bring a presidential system in Pakistan as the country’s Constitution of 1973 is parliamentary in nature. All that the parliament can do is to amend the Constitution but it cannot revoke it. In my opinion, bringing a presidential system in the country would literally mean tearing down an existing building – the parliamentary constitution – and then constructing a new building.
Is the Election Commission of Pakistan bound to conduct the 2023 elections using EVMs?
AA: The Election Commission is bound to follow the law or procedure which the parliament decides and it cannot make an alternative procedure on its own. Now the question is whether it is possible to procure these machines or implement this law in a year’s time? Let me tell you what will happen; these one hundred thousand or two hundred thousand or whatever number of machines required to conduct elections, cannot be provided to all the voters in time. Then, it will be a huge task to train the voters as well as the election staff on how to use the EVMs.
Like for instance what will they do if the battery of those machines falter or discharge or develop some bug, etc. Although, it is a fact too that, like all the other countries of the world, Pakistan will have to switch to the machines as well in the years to come. Will it happen in 2023 elections? This we cannot say with certainty.
