Monthly Archives: January 2014

ECONOMICS OF PROSTITUTION IN THE WORLD AND ITS IMPLICATIONS: THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Like the market for any commodity or service, the illicit commercial sex market is a function of supply and demand. Wherever demand occurs, supply and distribution emerge. The sex industry is lucrative and it has expanded rapidly in worldwide within the past few decades. For the men and women working in the sex trade, prostitution provides a way for people of low education to earn a high salary (Shrage, Laurie,2010). For the different countries, Sex tourism is the major source of foreign exchange and is vital to world’s economy. Unfortunately, only within the past three decades has the world governments given much attention to the social costs, such as the spread of HIV and the growth in human trafficking that the sex industry creates (World AIDS Campaign,2010 and CATW,2006).

ECONOMICS OF PROSTITUTION IN THE WORLD AND ITS IMPLICATIONS: INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

The organized crime has increased with market liberalization under the economic globalization to play a fundamental role in the global economy. The globalization of capitalism and new liberal policies has led to the spread of prostitution markets that quite widely subject to the organized crime gangs that contradict with the norm, religion and good ethics. This is not attributed to the reason that prostitution is outlawed or comes under the prohibition circle. Whether in the countries that consider prostitution is outlawed like (Tunisia, Germany, The Netherlands) or in the countries in which prostitution houses are owned by the state (Turkey and Indonesia), or in the countries that recognize prostitution as a vital industry for the national economy (Thailand and the Philippines), the role of organizes crime gangs remains fundamental in organizing the prostitution markets since violence is the decisive factor in producing the sex industry (Patricia Green,2010).

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: CIVIL SOCIETY IN PAKISTAN

CIVIL SOCIETY IN PAKISTAN

Some civil society organizations and human rights organizations and the lawyers movement which have pressed for greater adherence to democratic practices enjoy very limited base of support in Pakistan. Others are civil society organizations that are avowedly anti liberal and pursue an explicitly Islamist agenda. They use the rhetoric of democracy to undermine democracy (Fair, 2011). Others do not even entertain the rhetoric of democracy and explicitly state their goal of Islamizing Pakistan. The types of future of Pakistan these forces are fighting are orthogonal to each other’ (Fair, 2011:96). It can be safely inferred from this that civil society in Pakistan can neither be a countervailing force for democratization nor offer alternative policy paradigms in partnership or contradistinction to the state. If civil society in Pakistan is disparate and disjointed and their agendas are conflictual and does not, as such, have critical mass to be a political force, what other alternatives exist? Is the media or the liberalized media that can take the cudgels for democracy? Reviewing european life

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: INSTITUTIONAL CLASH

The empowered judiciary in Pakistan, of late has been using its suo moto power and intervening in a range of matters that are usually the prerogative of the Executive. Some hold this to be a salubrious check on the power structure of Pakistan while others deem this judicial activism to constitute ‘judicial dictatorship’. Institutional balance is important and a critical predicate for a healthy polity. An imbalance of power among institutions can lead to a warped polity impinging negative on democratization and governance. ‘Pakistan is , on account of this development, experiencing a steady attempt by the Supreme and the High Courts to expand their domain of action’. Sensing tension between the judiciary and the PPP led government, the opposition parties have endeavored to turn the judiciary into an area of contestation with the PPP’. They have gone to court on a number of purely political issues that should have been settled through political interaction or through the Parliament’ (Rizvi, 2012). This overt politicization of the judiciary augurs ill for the polity and potentially creates space for the intervention of the military into the politics of Pakistan. As such, it cannot be held to be the panacea for Pakistan’s ills and constitute the bed rock for its democratization.

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: THE RETURN OF POLITICS?

THE RETURN OF POLITICS?

The formation of the government by the Pakistan’s People’s Party in coalition with other parties’ begat hopes that a genuine democratic transition was taking place. They took measures that amounted to rollback of policies initiated and made my Musharaf.’In April 2010, the National Assembly fulfilled a long standing PPP vow to overturn non democratic constitutional amendments made under Musharaf. On April 8, the body unanimously passed the 18th Amendment bill, which President Zardari signed in as law’ (Konstradt, 2010:60). ‘Among the most notable of the 102 clauses of the bill were those removing the president’s power to dismiss the prime minister and Parliament, transferring to the Prime Minister the lead role in appointing armed services chiefs, ending the court’s abilities to suspend the Constitution; limiting the President’s ability to impose Emergency rule; removing the bar against prime ministerial candidates who had previously served two terms, changing the name of the North Western Frontier Province to Pakhtunkhwa; and ceding four new Senate seats for non Muslim minorities’ (Konstradt, 2010:60). However, in the scheme of things, this amounts to tinkering as the same old power structure and the institutions underpinning it remain entrenched. Payday Loans Online

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: THE DEATH OF POLITICS IN PAKISTAN

It may be, instead of , delineating a chronological sequence of Pakistan’s political convolutions dating from Pakistan’s inception be more germane and apposite to lay out the salient political developments of the past decade or so. This may help us put into perspective the potential for democracy in Pakistan and also assess its prospects. Alan Konstradt’s assessment of the nature and drift of Pakistan has a contemporary resonance. He posits ‘Pakistan’s political setting remains fluid, with ongoing power struggles between the executive and the judiciary which could lead to renewed military intervention in the political system’ (Konstradt, 2010:2). Even though a degree of peace prevails between various institutions of the Pakistani state at this point in time, the fact remains that there is an underlying tension and clash between these with the judiciary and the executive at loggerheads with each other. The genesis of this institutional clash may be traced to the moment when former president Pervez Musharaf seized power in a bloodless coup in 1999. It may not be inaccurate to say that Musharaf essentially choked and killed in Pakistan ‘From 1999 to 2008, Army General Pervez Musharaf ran the government after leading a bloodless coup unseating the elected government of Nawaz Sharif (Konstradt, 2010:57).

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: PAKISTAN AND ITS DISCONTENTS

DISCONTENTS

Conceived as a homeland for Muslims of South Asia, where they could live safely and securely and reach efflorescence, Pakistan, it could be said, has not lived up to its promise. The reasons may lie in the dichotomy between the ideational premise or the slogan of Pakistan and the nature of the entity(state), that its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah , had in mind. Islam was sought as the slogan and the rallying cry for both the Pakistan movement and the Pakistani state to weld it into a coherent nation. ‘Establishing Islam as the state ideology was a device at defining Pakistani identity during the country’s formative years. Indeed Pakistan’s leaders started playing on the religious sentiment as a means of strengthening the country’s national identity shortly after Pakistan’s creation (Haqqani, 2004-5:5).

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: DISAGGREGATING THE NATURE

At the risk of sounding tautological, it may be posited that the historical and contemporary situation and condition of Pakistan lends itself to the assertion that Pakistan displays strong features of not only patrimonialism but also praetorianism and semi authoritarianism. It is, to use the Huntingtonian phrase, ruled by an ‘oligarchic praetorian elite’ with the military at the forefront. ‘The military in Pakistan, according to Talat Masood, has historically co-opted a cross section of the political elite and shared office but not power with them to give a democratic facade to the regime. These politicians enjoy the benefits of being in office but do not exercise real power and have to accept the rule of the President and the army’ (2007:3). Political parties in Pakistan then operate under structural constraints imposed by various military regimes. And this condition has fostered a degree of lassitude and paralysis wherein these parties. Instead of interest articulation and aggregation, they take recourse to clientist networks and indulge in patron client relationships. This impacts the state as the state is viewed as a source of largesse and this largesse is in turn doled out to clients or patronage networks. This condition then renders the elections and the electoral process rather infructuous and not reflective of genuine and substantive democracy and genuine power rotation. In fact, the leverage exerted by the oligarchic praetorian elite over political parties and the political parties links to the power structure of Pakistan renders these into a tool in the hands of the army- a situation that , as we shall see, reflects semi authoritarianism. So what are the features of semi authoritarian regimes?

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: WEAK STATES AND PATRIMONIALISM

PATRIMONIALISM

The natural concomitant to this condition is weak or more accurately the intermittent attempts to impose some degree of coherence to both the state and the nation. This top down attempt inevitably leads to a fragmented polity where the commitment to democracy is largely rhetorical and other actors and groups like the army step in to fill the void. The polity then exhibits characteristics and features of praetorianism ,,patrimonialism and semi authoritarianism which may be the logical corollary to incoherence and dichotomy between the state and nation, weak state structures and crisis of legitimacy.

THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: DEMOCRACY AND ITS CONTENTS

The concept and practice of democracy is vast and broad. Elaborating upon it is beyond the scope of this paper and a minimalist definition of democracy is propounded here. (There are variants of democracy. It is liberal democracy that we are referring to in this paper).Liberal democracy, according to, Francis Fukuyama, is more than majority voting in elections; it is a complex set of institutions that restrain and regularize the exercise of power through law and a system of checks and balances(Fukuyama, 2011:4) While free and fair elections are the sine qua non of democracy, it lacks substance if the electoral process is not coupled with the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, civil and political rights and freedoms of the people(www.democracy-asia.org). ‘The state must practice the principle of equal citizenship to all irrespective of religion, caste, ethnicity and regional background. It must also ensure equality of opportunity to all for advancement in social, political and economic domains and guarantee security of life and property of its citizens’ (www.democracy-asia.org).