Brake on Benazir

In the normal course, a judicial finding of corruption would be expected to put brakes on a political leader's career, if not end it alto...

In the normal course, a judicial finding of corruption would be expected to put brakes on a political leader8217;s career, if not end it altogether. Verdicts and sentencing in cases of political corruption are as rare in this part of the world as charges of corruption against politicians are common. The verdict of the ehtesab accountability bench of the Rawalpindi court puts Benazir Bhutto in a class of her own and the fallout will be watched all over the region. She and husband Asif Zardari, a former minister, were found guilty of accepting millions of dollars in illegal gratification, sentenced to five years in jail and barred from seeking political office. Their assets are to be confiscated immediately. It is an open question whether Bhutto8217;s political career will survive this devastating blow to her reputation. The cynical view is that she will as long as she does not get worn out or bankrupted by the long legal process ahead. It will involve an appeal to the supreme court against this verdict andcontesting other cases against her and Zardari which the Nawaz Sharif government still holds in reserve.

In this view, Pakistanis, like Indians, have long given up expectations of probity in public life and know their politicians will be venal to the bitter end. And, therefore, the political battle Bhutto intends to wage will be more decisive than her legal one. In the Pakistani context there are particular factors which encourage cynicism. One is the Sharif-Bhutto vendetta which each side has pursued by corrupting other institutions of government. Each side has taken turns to destroy the other through the courts. The cases Bhutto initiated when she was in power against several members of Sharif8217;s family and business associates have not been brought to a final conclusion. Sharif, more systematically, passed special laws and set up an ehtesab bureau to investigate Bhutto and has been able to get a verdict in two years. Both have contributed to the malaise in the system. Democratic institutions and practices, under constant assault by the very politicians who are required to build them, have still to strikedeep roots and earn widespread respect. Bhutto, for example, publicly accuses sitting judges of political and personal bias. As extraordinary as this is it is of a piece with what Sharif has done to reduce the independence and credibility of the judiciary.

It will not be surprising if ordinary people see the Rawalpindi verdict as a partisan process and a continuation of politics by other means. This will be a shame because it will be the loss of a major opportunity to drive home the lesson that politicians, no matter how powerful or popular, can and must be called to account under the law. Idealists can only hope that the political battles ahead over corruption and monumental greed will lead to demands for reform of the whole political establishment. For that to come about will require popular initiative. As economic hardship bites deeper, it is just possible more people will demand a full and honest account of public spending and the cleansing of public life.