Economy under the hammer – Jornal

MAYBE this is a good time to remember the Reko Diq judgment delivered by one of the most exalted and acclaimed Chief Justices of the Supreme Court. Or should we instead repeal the Dam Fund, along with threats to charge treason against those who dare criticize the effort?

Remember that fiasco, led by a chief justice who probably enjoyed the spotlight more than any of his predecessors? Or perhaps an article detailing in detail how another chief justice became obsessed with demolishing a residential building in Sharea Faisal, Karachi, leaving the families living there homeless and fighting to this day for compensation? How many remember how the same CJ who promised us that he would build a mega dam with funds donated by the public also became obsessed with the closure of the Punjab Kidney Liver Institute?

How many of us know what it takes to attract mega-investment in a mining project, or build a large hospital that provides free specialized care, or how infrastructure financing really works, or how the process of compensating displaced people affected by the government decisions? How many of us realize how long this list of follies and follies from the judges of the post-lawyer movement really is?

I have lawyer friends who dismiss this story as if it were all business as usual, or nothing more than a series of isolated moments during which some judges temporarily demonstrated poor judgment. But I have a different reading. These were moments when the truth about the so-called “independent judiciary” that emerged after the lawyers’ movement was revealed.

And what we saw was a judicial leadership more interested in interfering in executive decisions, in questioning the formulation of policies, in disqualifying prime ministers based on minute technical details, in arbitrarily fixing the price of sugar or in demanding an increase in subsidies to natural gas, in campaigning in favor of large dams, even when there were strong apprehensions in at least two provinces about the negative effects of these structures, and so on, in an endless series of ignorant decisions whose negative effects are still with us, even though those who made these decisions have entered into comfortable retirement.

Let us consider the consequences of the Reko Diq ruling. Since then, no private foreign investor has been willing to acquire large stakes in Pakistan without first negotiating protections for themselves from Pakistan’s own laws, courts, tax authorities and payment restrictions.

Since Pakistan, like many other Third World countries, cannot bear the costs of its own infrastructure needs, and no foreign investor was willing to take on exposure to such high and long-term risks, the country had no no choice but to finance its infrastructure. of the Chinese in the mid-2010s. The Chinese first asked for the same protections for themselves before committing to anything. Not all of this can be attributed to the Reko Diq ruling, but a significant amount certainly can.

We got an independent judiciary after the lawyers’ movement. But what exactly did the judges do with this expanded power?

Of course, we all remember the protracted arbitration that cost Pakistan tens of millions of dollars, the resulting $6 billion arbitration award, the struggle to renegotiate with Barrick Gold and re-enter into an agreement with them, only this time the agreement would be completely beyond the reach of the Supreme Court.

The consequences of this judgment on Pakistan’s investment environment were enormous, but its impact was strongly felt only by those directly involved in foreign investment and therefore flew under the radar of the conversation in the country, which has always been heavily debate-oriented. from the minutiae of the law, the gossip of the judges and the breathtaking live coverage of court proceedings.

The economy was already damaged by previous court rulings, from the days before the lawyers’ movement. One of them was the Steel Industry trial, which interrupted the privatization process. The second was the fact that the court rejected a long-term LNG deal due to allegations of corruption raised in a newspaper. This latest decision left Pakistan’s energy sector short of fuel, as vital indigenous natural gas reserves began to decline precipitously in those years. Anyone with memory will remember the gas shortage from 2010 to 2015.

Now understand this. In all these cases, the court alleged corruption. In none of these cases was the court able to find any evidence of corruption. All cases had long-term consequences whose costs could easily be counted in billions of rupees. However, there was no learning curve. Even in 2019, the court still interfered in the new LNG agreement that the country finally managed to obtain after the fiasco in which the first one ended.

Pakistan got an independent judiciary after the lawyers’ movement. But what exactly did the judges do with this expanded power they now possessed? Has the experience of ordinary citizens in the justice system improved as a result? Have the delays that clogged the courts reduced? Has the time needed to decide a case decreased? Has the number of cases being appealed decreased? Is there any indicator that shows that the main activity of the judiciary – the administration of justice in accordance with the law – has actually improved with the arrival of the independent judiciary?

Unfortunately, the answer is no. The independent judiciary of the post-lawyers movement era probably did more to undermine Pakistan’s response to critical challenges, such as finding alternatives to depleting domestic natural gas stocks or reforming or privatizing state-owned enterprises, than any other force at the same time. time. All the while, they have made no significant effort to reform their own affairs and improve the experience of justice seekers.

Today, many express regret that the independence of this judiciary has been restricted. But what did these people expect to happen, after a decade and a half of decisions motivated less by the law and more by spite, ignorance and ego?

The writer is a business and economics journalist.

[email protected]

X: @khurramhusain

Published in Dawn, October 24, 2024