Poverty and Development

It is widely recognized that development is about much more than growth of GDP. Equally, everyone appreciates that democracy is more than simply a matter of universal suffrage and the holding of regular multiparty elections, essential though these are. So we need to understand exactly what is meant by development and democracy today, in the twenty-first century.

There is a need to recognize the links between democracy and good governance on the one hand, and poverty, development and conflict on the other.

A strong, effective, accountable state is the first pillar of democracy and development. International institutions alone cannot and should not take responsibility for eradicating poverty, authoritarianism and conflict.

The foundations of a democratic state are worth recalling: a freely and fairly elected parliament that is broadly representative of the people; an executive (government) that is answerable to parliament; an independent judiciary; a police force that responds to the law for its operations and the government for its administration; and armed forces that are answerable to government and parliament.

The financial affairs of any democratic government should be monitored by parliament through a public accounts committee, and by an auditor-general answerable to parliament.

Civil society is the third pillar of pro-poor development and democratization. Building the capacity of citizens’ organizations and a free and well-informed media are critical for promoting citizen participation, holding government to account and empowering poor communities. Poor people and poor communities, for example, are in the best position to understand and articulate their own needs, and their voices should be heard directly within government. But they are not and here political rights and opportunities can be bolstered through community action.

The media plays an important role both in giving voice to citizens and in holding government and the private sector to account on their behalf.

Where international economic organizations such as the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO set down conditionality or constraints on policy, it must be in the pursuit of pro-poor development, and must work in ways that do not erode democratic institutions and human rights at the national and sub-national levels.

There is a need for responsibility, partnership and concrete actions – from the government, private sector, civil society and international community. Without responsibility on all these levels, development and democracy will remain rhetoric rather than become reality.

The principal aim of development no longer focuses on maximizing marketable production of goods. The emphasis now is on expanding opportunities and strengthening human capacities to lead long, healthy, creative and fulfilling lives. Development is about enabling people to have the ‘capabilities’ to do and be the things that they have reason to value. Poverty is the deprivation of basic capabilities and development as the process of ensuring that the most basic capabilities are achieved by all.

Basic capabilities include: being adequately nourished, avoiding preventable morbidity and premature mortality, being effectively sheltered, having a basic education, being able to ensure security of the person, having equitable access to justice, being able to appear in public without shame, being able to earn a livelihood and being able to take part in the life of a community.

Developing countries have a weak administrative capacity. Public officials are poorly trained or lack experience in public expenditure management. State institutions, such as ministries and judiciaries lack sufficient resources or are plagued by entrenched systems of corruption. Inadequate numbers of women at decision-making levels in the civil service and judiciary means that women’s interests are not represented in policy formulation and implementation.

Ill-health is also a cause of poverty. A single experience of sickness in a family can divert energy and resources, leaving the household in deep poverty. Diseases such as malaria, and tuberculosis are not only personal tragedies; a high prevalence of such diseases is associated with significant reductions in economic growth.

Many anti-poverty plans are no more than vaguely formulated strategies. Developing countries need a genuine action plans - with explicit targets, adequate budgets and effective organizations. They do not have explicit poverty plans but incorporates poverty into national planning. And many of these then appear to forget the topic.

The governments have difficulty in reporting how much funding goes to poverty reduction - unable to distinguish between activities that are related to poverty and those that are not. They confuse social spending with poverty-related spending. But much government spending could be considered pro-poor if it disproportionately benefits the poor. Under these conditions it is probably best to set up a special poverty reduction fund - to give a better financial accounting and to allow government departments and ministries to apply to the fund for financing for their poverty-focused programs.

The scope of development policy has become broader, making ‘pro-poor development’ a vital additional analytical category that orients attention towards those people most in need. Recognizing that ‘development’ is still used loosely in the policy world to refer to development strategies, rather than particularly for poor people, it is important to distinguish and promote ‘pro-poor development’. Development policies aimed at the general population may have a more limited positive impact on particularly disadvantaged groups. Pro-poor development concerns those policies that are specifically designed to enhance the quality of the lives of the poor. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Cutting out the future of Lahore

After a process of evolution our local government system has devolved power at the doorsteps of local communities and as part of this arrangement, Lahore today has an elected Nazim (mayor) and elected council. Lahore is a wonderful city of a great historical interest. Not just the intellectual grandeur of the city is charismatic but also the well-endowed cultural heritage. In the same breath, owing to its fast track urbanization, Lahore lends out and out challenges and opportunities to the Lahore District Nazim, Amer Mahmood. He needs to look and see how to invent Lahore’s future. Implicitly and explicitly, it is high time for making local democracy work for the residents of this old city.

For making Lahore a futuristic city, it needs leadership in action—leadership that anticipates change and harnesses it to positive advantage. The city requires strength in diversity, partnership, and citizen participation, which Amer Mahmood must offer. He needs to innovate, create and lead. The city must have a destiny to sustain. The challenge is to make change our friend, not the enemy.

Amer Mahmood must be deeply involved in making and reviewing policy for transforming Lahore into a city of future. It will work best if he also respects the roles, expertise, and goals that elected and appointed officials bring to city governance. They should sit down together and develop relationships that work in this term. It is also time for the city to take greater responsibility for its economic future.

He should work with the Lahore Chamber of Commerce & Industry to explore how City Government can more effectively participate and partner in shaping Lahore’s economic future. The two institutions can focus on substantial issues and work together on a strategy for change and reform.

For making Lahore a modern city it should welcome the information age while providing ways for people to come together. Besides technology initiatives Amer Mahmood should push off policy initiatives and thus help people connect. This should create opportunities and places for people to gather. The city of Lahore to prosper in the 21st Century needs to improve its capacity to deal successfully with the new international context. The most successful will be closely connected to the rest of the world—through trade, transportation, technology, education, arts and culture. Indeed, the future promises dramatic and significant life style choices for exercise and connection.

Civics of the 21st Century will be more about relationships between people than about structures of government. The key is to get people talking and working together across the boundary lines that traditionally divide and diminish a community.

We expect from Amer Mahmood to offer the leadership that reaches from neighborhood to region to global. There are important and timely opportunities for thinking and acting outside of the box.

We need a new approach to transit in Lahore. Increasing traffic congestion is a fact of life. We cannot build our way out of the problem. Any solution must include improved rapid transit.
Amir Mahmood should plan a process to design a transit system for people to ride. He should develop a passion in making busses work for everyone.

He should also create places worthy of our affection. Indeed, he can create such places. He must take decisive steps for making Lahore as the business, governmental, cultural, and educational center of the 21st Century. For that matter he must take deliberate steps today to shape the future of tomorrow. The best way to do it is to invent future. He must go for it, search out and use the concepts of smart growth and new urbanism.

His task should heave in “leadership in the key of e,” that is, enterprise, environment, education, E-commerce and E-government, and eccentricity. These are the tools by which he can bring benefit to that which is most important—the people—not an extension of global uniformity, but a unique people, in a unique place and made unique by their collective endeavor.

We need a new – a different – local government to continue the task of modernizing Lahore—a new role for a new century. A role that challenges the sense of inevitable decline that has hung over local government in the previous years and provides local people and their representatives with new opportunities.

With strong leadership, the best days of cities lie ahead. So be it for Lahore. Lahore in coming days is an exciting, diverse, urban, and a futuristic city—a good place to live as well as to work and do business. It also is an exciting time for all those involved in the art and politics of city building. The right principles and the right leadership, together we can make a difference in Lahore.

Amer Mahmood should be more than a ribbon-cutter. Although he does plenty of those over and above his prolific role, he must also heighten further his attention on community safety, cleaning up the city, and making the environment business friendly. He should be involved in determining the vision for the city, not in terms of day-to-day administration, but as the key figure in deciding policy and direction for growth.

To be a good Nazim of pride, Amer Mahmood must articulate the vision of a better place and future; must lay down the challenge to constantly do better – to never rest on laurels – then cheer the community along as they work at delivering that vision; the economy, jobs, life-long education, transport, public safety, health, well-being and always, the environment.

He must reach for this vision using the tools of the 21st Century; even anticipating tools not yet even made. We don’t want the smokestacks of yesterday, we want the technology of tomorrow. Lahore is ready for a progressive city that focuses on the future. He should reach beyond what he knows to grasp and that might be a bit ahead of its time. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Ijtihad: The Road to Spiritual Democracy

Abstract
The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as conceived by Islam, is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change. Without freedom and democracy ijtihad cannot be performed. Democracy is the key to opening up ijtihad—the key to solving the principal problems confronting the Muslim world today. That is the thesis of this paper. It discusses ijtihad and its role in addressing the contemporary needs of Muslim societies. My paper also explicates the way ijtihad works, and how can it be used to address the needs of Muslim societies in the twenty-first century. It brings into question: Who has the right to perform ijtihad, and how should Islam adapt to changing societal conditions, needs, and priorities in its quest for social justice and equality?

This paper also converges on the needed solutions to the prevailing crisis and development of modern Muslim societies and reconciling their understanding of Islam and the message of the Quran with changing needs, circumstances, and priorities in Muslim societies.

Permanence and Change
Perpetual change, adjustment, and movement-inevitable aspects of human society-have been recognized by every succeeding generation, as it marks its losses and gains.

Yet, at any given time, there is a local sense of continuity. But every culture, of course, experiences both continuity and change: over the longest term, these changes may be so radical that they amount to a new cultural or socio-economic form, but in the shorter term they are more often a change of content, not of form.

Whereas the basic principles that govern economy and society may stay the same, many of the devices, rules, and customs that mediate between these principles, on the one hand, and material production, on the other, are constantly developing.

Any loyalty to a social system makes sense only when we recognize the existence and importance of deep feelings of continuity, which are perhaps the very essence of a sense of culture.

In order to find reconciliation between stability and change, Islamic society finds eternal principles to regulate its collective life; for the eternal gives us a foothold in the world of perpetual change.

Change is inevitable in human life and society. Dr Muhammad Iqbal, recognized as the Poet of the East, also says that it is only revolution, which is permanent and everything else keeps on changing. In the event of constant change, can religion and religious law remain unchanged? Again the important question is what is permanent in religion? Is there any component, which changes? Does divine mean something static? Then what is the meaning of the Quranic verse ...every day He manifests Himself in yet another (wondrous) way (29:55).

Ijtihad
However since eternal principles can also be debilitating if they are understood as excluding all change, the dynamism of ijtihad is necessary. Ijtihad keeps its body and soul together with the principle derived from Quran: Nor should the believers all go forth together: If a contingent from every expedition remained behind. They could devote themselves to studies in religion, and admonish the people when they return to them—that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil). (9:122)

The science of ijtihad (or reasoning and interpretation) was developed by Muslim scholars in order to understand and apply the message of the Quran to varying societal needs and conditions. This process is based not only on the Quran and religious tradition (sunna), but also on reason, and prioritization.

Ijtihad has the meaning of being an authority in the matters of Islam; but there are two ways of being an authority and deriving opinions in the matters of Islam: one which is in accordance with the shari`a, and one which is forbidden by it.

Now, the kind of ijtihad which, in my opinion, is forbidden is that which means legislating or enacting the law, by which we mean that the mujtahid passes a judgment which is not in the Quran or the Sunna but according to his own thought and his own opinion. The sources of legislation, and the valid proofs for determining the shar`ia, are given as the Book, the Sunna and ijtihad.

The commands which are given in the shari`a from the Book and the Sunna are limited and finite, whereas circumstances and events which occur are not, so another source in addition to the Book and the Sunna must be appointed for the legislation of Divine commands - and that source is the very same as we have defined as ijtihad alra'y.

Ijtihad gradually found a wider meaning, i.e., the employment of careful consideration and reasoning in reaching an understanding of the valid proofs of the shari`a. This, of course needs a series of sciences as a suitable preliminary basis on which to develop the ability to consider and reason correctly and systematically. The `ulama of Islam gradually realized that the deduction and derivation of the precepts from the combined valid proofs of the shari`a necessitated the learning of a series of preparatory sciences and studies such as the sciences of literature, logic, the Quranic sciences and tafsir (Quranic exegesis), the science of hadith and the narrators of hadith (rijal alhadith), the science of the methodology of usul alfiqh, and even a knowledge of the fiqh of the other sects of Islam. A mujtahid was someone who was a master of all these sciences.

Ijtihad as used today means competence and expert technical knowledge. It is obvious that someone who wants to refer to the Quran and hadith must know how to explain the meaning of the Quran, he must know the meaning of the verses, which verses abrogate which verses, which ones have clear meanings and which ones ambiguous meanings - and he must be able to distinguish which hadith is valid and authoritative and which not. In addition, he must understand, on the basis of correct rational principles, incompatibilities between hadiths to the extent that it is possible for him to resolve them. In the verses of the Quran themselves, and similarly in the hadith, a series of general principles for verification and interpretation are laid down, and the use and exercise of these principles need training and practice, just as in the case of all other basic principles in every science. Like the skilled technician who knows which material to choose from all the materials available to him, the mujtahid must have proficiency and ability. In hadith, especially, there is a great deal of fabrication, the true and the false are mixed together; the expert must have the power to distinguish between them. In short, he must have enough preliminary knowledge so that he can exercise competence, authority and technical expertise.

Every day Muslims are faced with new problems in their lives, and they do not know how to confront them as Muslims. Basically, the 'secret' of ijtihad lies in applying general principles to new problems and changed circumstances. The real mujtahid is one who has mastered this secret, who has observed how things change, and subsequently how the rulings on them have changed.

The work of a mujtahid is the deduction and derivation of the precepts of the shari`a; but his knowledge and understanding of all things, in other words, his worldview, has a great influence on the decisions he makes. If we imagine a mujtahid who is always sitting in the corner of his house or his madrasa, and compare him with a mujtahid who is conversant with the currents of life, both of them refer back to the valid proofs of the shari`a, but each one of them will derive his legal rulings in a particular way, using a particular method.

In all the world's sciences - medicine, mathematics, law, literature and philosophy - branches of specialization have been created, and for that very reason progress has been accelerated in each of these branches. Some mujtahids also take as their specialization `ibadat (the rites of Islam), and others mu`amilat (transactions), some siyasat (politics), and other ahkam (criminal law); Thus, each mujtahid can study his own branch more thoroughly.

Many people wonder why it is that the mujtahids differ at times in their decrees, when the basis of their Ijtihad are the same. It should be observed that difference in scientific opinions is not to be taken as a sign of a substantial defect in the quest for knowledge. It is rather, a sign that knowledge moves in progressive steps towards perfection. Differences of opinions are to be found in all sciences, not just in fiqh.

A mujtahid who may sometimes make a mistake while practicing the act of deriving Islamic laws from their original sources - the Quran and the sunnah - but his mistake is not done blindly and at random but due to his insufficiency or inadequacy in his scientific tools or his self capacity which causes him to be unable in deriving legal law as it is formulated in the world of law and a divine Shari'ah.

Contrarily, an example is a case in which Imam Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafi'i, one of the founders of Islamic jurisprudence, gave a certain legal opinion in Baghdad. One year later he moved to Cairo, and in response to the same question he gave a very different opinion. Someone questioned him, "Oh Imam, last year in Baghdad you gave a different answer," and he replied, "That was in Baghdad and this is in Cairo. That was last year and this is now." When employing ijtihad, scholars considered the time, place, norms, and prevailing conditions when they rendered their religious advice and opinions.

Some scholars depend on some of these sources in formulating laws while others refuse to do so pointing out the drawbacks of these sources.

It is useful to point out the main principles, which serve as necessary conditions in the process of juristic reasoning (Ijtihad). Among them are the following:
1. Certainly, the Quran and sunnah are two main sources in formulating Islamic laws.
2. No one has the right to give his own Ijtihad in any case whenever there is a legal law in the Book of Allah and the Prophet's sunnah. "...And whatever the Messenger gives you accept it, and whatever he forbids you, abstain (therefrom)" (59:7)
3. Only one judgment for one subject falling under the same circumstances and conditions, and which represents the pure legal opinion.
4. The laws discovered by the faqih are only estimated but not final and should therefore be subjected to scientific discussion and strict legal scrutiny.
5. As a result of the previous point, we should understand that the process of juristic reasoning is a critical one in which discovered opinion undergoes a thorough accurate criticism, and evaluation in order to arrive at the correct law. No juristic reasoning could be considered sound if it is not subjected to criticism and scientific discussion.
6. Juristic reasoning should be pure and free from any fanaticism or internal and external factors such as political and sectarian tendencies and should be capable of withstanding scientific analysis and criticism. Therefore, Ijtihad is a scientific process based on research and inquiry.

It is also important to bear in mind the two aspects of religion, and it applied to all religions of the world, i.e. transcendental and transient. The transcendental is immutable whereas the transient as the word itself indicates is subject to change depending on the contingencies of the situation. What we understand by the Shari'ah is composed of both the elements i.e. transcendent and transient or, in other words, the divine and human. The Quran also incorporates both the elements. For example the institution of slavery is a transient one whereas the concepts of human dignity, equality and fraternity are all transcendental.

In a fast changing world recourse to ijtihad is a must and Islam is among those religions which approves of healthy change and allows its believers to not only grapple with the changes taking place around them but also to strive to reapply Islamic principles of jurisprudence.

Spiritual Democracy
Religious establishments impose restrictions on the contemporary practice of ijtihad. Nonetheless, democracy and freedom of inquiry and expression are essential to the practice of ijtihad and to the successful reconciliation of Islam and modernity.

Today's proponents of ijtihad take a far more expansive view. "There will be no Islamic democracy unless jurists permit the democratization of interpretation. Political elites in the Muslim world have for centuries restricted the development of democracy and political accountability by hiding behind religious principles that they proclaim to be fixed in stone. In effect, for an end run around the entire traditional apparatus of Muslim jurisprudence. Believers should instead look directly to the Quran and to the practices of Muhammad (pbuh) and his companions, and use their own efforts at interpretation to build ethical communities.

The reformist interest in ijtihad is not new. For more than a century, Muslim scholars and activists have cited the concept as they have tried to respond to the trauma of colonialism and its aftermath. In his 1934 book The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, poet Dr Muhammad Iqbal, argued for transferring "the power of ijtihad from individual representatives of (legal) schools to a Muslim legislative assembly," which would build toward "spiritual democracy, which is the ultimate aim of Islam."

The latest proponents celebrate a much more inclusive model of ijtihad. No jurist can single-handedly interpret Islam. Shariah should be by shura," or consultation, he says. "We should all consult among ourselves and conclude what God is telling us. ... Interpretation of God's message is the quintessential quality of humanity. To take away from me my right to interpret Islam, you have to deprive me of my humanity.

Creativity built on the belief that there were always new possibilities available and that God gave us this earth and this life with permission to use them creatively. Legal reasoning—even the best legal reasoning—is not the solution to our problems. Our problems are not going to be solved by having scholars think more deeply. If we limit change and innovation to only those who have qualifications to reason from the text, we are not going to get anywhere.

It is hoped that by the conclusion of this paper, the audience will see Islam in a new light, not as a form of religious dogma, but as a guide to making choices based on intelligence and reason. New awareness almost always creates more questions to answers than answers to questions. It is this mode of thinking that allows for scientific progress. In principle, a democratic process allows and encourages all questions and points of view, even those, which challenge the principles of democracy, although this is the ideal more often than the reality. When the ideal is the reality, the process remains dynamic. In a dogmatic regime, the process becomes static, even in a supposedly democratic regime. The truth has been declared and no other point of view will shake it or change it. Asif J. Mir, Organizational Transformation

Making a Dead Set at Corruption

Corruption is an insidious plague that has a wide range of corrosive effects on society. It undermines democracy and the rule of law, leads to violations of human rights, distorts markets, erodes quality of life, and allows organized crime, terrorism and other threats to human society to flourish. As defined by Transparency International: “Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.” According to Kofi Annan, “Corruption hurts the poor disproportionately—by diverting funds intended for development, undermining a government’s ability to provide basic services, feeding inequality and injustice, and discouraging foreign investment and aid.”

The good news is that future of corruption is not so bright it will not entirely finish though.

No country is entirely free of corruption. Efforts to fight corruption encourage transparency and accountability, thanks to an increased understanding of corruption's social and economic costs. There is the need for expanding the econometric framework, as well as to more general future research directions and policy implications in the field of governance.

Corruption is principally a governance issue, a failure of institutions and a lack of capacity to manage society by means of a framework of social, judicial, political and economic checks and balances. Good governance and globalization (at both the country as well as at the city level) do matter for performance in terms of access and quality of delivery of infrastructure services.

Corruption is deeply embedded in the political culture and poverty of Pakistan. Regulatory bodies are particularly vulnerable to corruption as they have the power to make key decisions on profit-making activities. Corrupt regulatory bodies can thus dangerously impede economic development.

Discretion creates more opportunities for corruption than where regulatory requirements are laid out through clear, precise and formal rules. Debate about corruption tends to focus almost exclusively on the receivers of corruption, rather than the purveyors. Corruption is alive and well and living in myriads of places. Bribery is simply the way business is done in Pakistan.

Within Pakistan's political dynamics, corruption figures as a very critical element. Prevalence of corruption in various political regimes has been the main cause of their downfall. The incumbents have placed accountability and the anti-corruption drive very high on its agenda in form of NAB its operational approach is rather controversial.

Corruption increases the number of capital projects undertaken and tends to enlarge their size and complexity. The result is that, paradoxically, some public investment can end up reducing a country’s growth because, even though the share of public investment in gross domestic product (the total of all goods and services produced in a country in a given year) may have risen, the average productivity of that investment is dropped.

For a private enterprise, getting a contract to execute a project, especially a large one, can be very profitable. Therefore, managers of these enterprises may be willing to offer commission to politicians who help them win the contract. Conversely, in many cases the act of bribery may not start with the enterprise but with the officials who control the decisions. It is apparently impossible to win a government contract in Pakistan without first paying a bribe. Interestingly, the laws of certain major industrial countries regard commissions paid by domestic enterprises to foreign politicians as not only legal but also tax deductible.

In some of these phases, a strategically placed high-level official or elected leader can manipulate the process to select a particular project. He can also tailor the specifications of the design to favor a given enterprise by, for example, providing inside information to that enterprise at the time of issuance of tender.

The enterprise that pays the commission rarely suffers from the payment of the bribe, since it is fairly simple to recover that cost. First, if corrupt officials of winning the bidding competition assure it, the enterprise can include the cost of the commission in its bid. Second, it can reach an understanding with the influential official that the initial low bid can be adjusted upward along the way, presumably to reflect modifications to the basic design. Third, it can reduce its spending on the project by the amount of the bribe by skimping on the quality of the work performed and the materials used. Fourth, if the contract is stipulated in a cost-plus fashion, the enterprise can recover the cost of the commission by overpricing.

The first step towards tackling corruption is preventing it. In attempting to prevent the laundering of proceeds of corruption mechanisms need to set up to review suspicious transactions, and analyze financial information.

Transparency and accountability in matters of public finance must also be promoted, and specific requirements established for the prevention of corruption, in particularly critical areas of the public sector, such as public procurement.

Citizens have the right to expect a high standard of conduct from their public servants. They also have to participate in preventing public corruption. For these reasons there is a need to actively encourage and promote the involvement of non-governmental and community based organizations, as well as, other elements of civil society, and to raise public awareness of corruption and what can be done about it.

There is a requirement for the prevention of corruption in the judiciary. Decision-making should be entrusted to committees rather than individuals. Although this adds to the cost of regulation, it may eventually save money by facilitating mutual monitoring and accountability.

New attitudes, better financial systems, prosecution of the guilty, better management of diamonds and real accountability to the people … this is the agenda for change. In taking it forward, the leading role must obviously be taken by the people and Government. But tackling corruption effectively requires a real focus, coordinated action and shared responsibility. Everyone’s energies must be thrown behind this anti-corruption strategy. It is the key to a better future for the people of Pakistan. (www.asifjmir.com)