The News
November 07, 2007
Editorial
Civil society vs the state
Rather ironically, as a result of an emergency stated to be directed against terrorism, it is civil society that is facing the brunt of the state's wrath. Whereas there have been no news reports regarding the arrest of key militants, lawyers, human rights activists and journalists have all been mercilessly targeted. At least three hundred lawyers were arrested during protests in Karachi and Lahore on Monday and on Tuesday a lawyers' rally in Multan was brutally lathi-charged. Others, women among them, were badly beaten and bludgeoned by the police. This seems odd, given that, in most circumstances, these groups would be seen as being opposed to militancy, and as such, logically speaking, should be lining up on the same side of the divide as the forces of President Pervez Musharraf. The fact that this has not happened suggests the measures taken by the state are intended to deal with dissent -- rather than terrorism. But the ongoing tussle also says something about 'civil society' in the country and what this loosely defined group represents.
Today, 'civil society' has now come to mean essentially the lawyers -- locked since March this year in a brave tussle against the government. Alongside them stands a small group of activists, most of them linked to NGOs, and journalists, who themselves have been made victims of the emergency. But, it is sad that 'civil society' today seems to include few of the groups that have traditionally taken up the role of a vanguard in struggles. Perhaps most conspicuous among those who are missing are students -- a group that has become increasingly depoliticised over the past two decades, largely as a consequence of official policies. But in addition, labour unions too have been absent, while traders and other organised elements appear still to be waiting and watching.
While talking of civil society, it must be noted that the position activists and professionals find themselves in is one for which they are ill-equipped. The task of leading mass agitations should be taken up by political parties, rather than other, smaller groups. The fact that these civil society organisations have been forced into the role they are now playing says a great deal about the failures of mainstream parties and their inability, or unwillingness, to take a position on fundamental issues, such as democracy. Certainly, in the present time of crisis, civil society groups are many strides ahead of the parties who have, so far, adopted a somewhat dubious policy of watching from the sidelines. It is not yet known if their line of action will change. But without the support of mass organisations it would be unrealistic to expect that civil society, on its own, can indefinitely put up a stand against the might of the state, which this time round, from the evidence seen so far, is determined to use the force at its disposal both ruthlessly and relentlessly.
