چودھری شجاعت حسین کا سیاسی سچ

[سیاسی قضیے: [21 اگست، 2018

!سچ تو یہ ہے
چودھری شجاعت حسین
فیروز سنز لمیٹڈ، لاہور
بار اول مارچ 2018
بار دوم اپریل 2018

توجہ: سیاست و معیشت سے متعلق کتب تبصرے کے لیے اس پتے پر بھیجیے: ڈاکٹر خلیل احمد، پوسٹ باکس نمبر: 933 جی پی او، لاہور۔ 54000

سچ بولنے کے کئی انداز ہو سکتے ہیں۔ پورا سچ نہ کہا جائے۔ یا صرف اپنا سچ بیان کر دیا جائے۔

جہاں تک سیاست دانوں کا تعلق ہے، تو ان کا سچ اکثر اوقات سیاسی ہوتا ہے۔ یعنی رات گئی، بات گئی۔ یعنی یہ سچ کسی مواد کا حامل نہیں ہوتا، بس بول دیا جاتا ہے۔ یہ علاحدہ بات ہے کہ سیاسی سچ جس موقعے پر بولا جاتا ہے، اس وقت جو سیاست دان یہ سچ بولتا ہے، اسے فائدہ ضرور دے جاتا ہے۔

جیسے کہ ’’پینتیس (35) پنکچر‘‘ والا (عمران خان کا) سچ ایک سیاسی بیان ثابت ہوا۔ اور …

The perils of judicial populism

Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to the pressures of the times.

– Warren E. Burger (1907-1995), Chief Justice, US Supreme Court.
The best thing that explains the Supreme Court’s (SC’s) July 20 judgment is: it is never too late to mend. As is being claimed, the judgment is historic, it is daring, it is a people’s verdict, and a turning point in Pakistan’s history. Of course, it is all these or maybe more, but things are meaningful only in a context. Without context, they lose their import. This is more so with the SC’s judgment that unanimously reinstated Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Chief Justice (CJ) of Pakistan, setting aside the presidential reference against him.
Besides its own significance, what makes the judgment unusually extraordinary are the reservations, apprehensions and

The perils of judicial populism

Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to the pressures of the times.
– Warren E. Burger (1907-1995), Chief Justice, US Supreme Court.

The best thing that explains the Supreme Court’s (SC’s) July 20 judgment is: it is never too late to mend. As is being claimed, the judgment is historic, it is daring, it is a people’s verdict, and a turning point in Pakistan’s history. Of course, it is all these or maybe more, but things are meaningful only in a context. Without context, they lose their import. This is more so with the SC’s judgment that unanimously reinstated Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Chief Justice (CJ) of Pakistan, setting aside the presidential reference against him.

Besides its own significance, what makes the judgment unusually extraordinary are the reservations, apprehensions and misunderstandings being thrown out from all the quarters concerned,

What’s the game, politically speaking?

Note: I completed this article on December 9, 2014, and wrote: “(Government) ought not to be afraid of martial law the prospects of which are zero presently, rather minus.” Now merely 9 months later the prospects of martial law have grown formidably positive; so what’s the game, politically speaking, let’s try to see:
What’s the game, politically speaking?
In democracy, only a majority party is allowed to rule, and it may turn out to be a tyranny; no smaller party alone can lay a claim to that privilege. That’s the advantage of democracy one can cite while arguing with its enemies. Pakistan and other countries like it are an exception. In such countries, parties of every size can unleash a rule of tyranny under the banner of populism. Thus all the gatherings and processions of every size which such parties hold are quoted as a referendum against the government. Both

Why Pakistan is not a viable state?

Better to start with two clarifications: First, this piece does not raise the question of Pakistani state’s viability in the sense Pakistan’s Leftists and liberals are wont to discuss it. They say something like that: It’s unviable because it was created by the British in line with their policy of Divide and Rule; It’s unviable because it was created by the narrow-mindedness of Hindus or the Congress, or the stubbornness of Muslims or the League. They also hold that: It’s unviable because religion is never the basis of any state. The writer prospectively believes that states are not rational entities; they may come into existence, and disintegrate and disperse into more entities with or without any rational justifications. It’s like individuals or groups of human beings who want to live separately for any concrete or imagined grievances or none at all that

My new book, “Pakistan’s Democratic Impasse: Analysis and the Way Forward” published / released

Here is the media release:
New book – “Pakistan’s Democratic Impasse” published
The book indicts politicians as the main culprit for failing the state of Pakistan
The book falsifies the myth of blaming the Pakistan Army for the ills Pakistanis facing
Author argues constitution authorizes politicians to rule, not the Army 

 Lahore April 8, 2014: Alternate Solutions Institute released today Dr. Khalil Ahmad’s new book, Pakistan’s Democratic Impasse – Analysis and the Way Forward. Already this in 2012 and this February, he has published three books, “Pakistan Mein Riyasti Ashrafiya Ka Urooj” (The Rise of State Aristocracy in Pakistan, February 2012), “Siyasi Partian Ya Siyasi Bandobast: Pakistani Siyasat Ke Pech-o-Khum Ka Falsafiyani Muhakma” (Political Parties Or Political Arrangements: A Philosophical Critique of the Intricacies of Pakistani Politics, July 2012), and, Pakistani Kashakash: Tehleel-O-Tadeel aur Aagay Barhany ka Rasta (Pakistani Armageddon: Analysis,