'Real Democracy'

On ‘real’ democracy....................I watched General Musharraf’s speech at Liaqat Bagh on T.V last night in which he claimed that he had given Pakistan the ‘real democracy’. General Ayub had given Pakistan a ‘basic democracy’, which was also ‘real democracy’ as far as he was concerned. Then, General Yahya had also given us his version of a ‘real democracy’ till the country broke up. Yahya had even gone to the extent of giving Pakistan his own new constitution, which he said, would put Pakistan on the road to democracy. Still later, came Zia, another general, who gave us a partyless, but ‘real’ nevertheless, democracy in 1985. Take a look at what happened to all these versions of the ‘real democracy’ the moment their founding fathers in uniform left the scene. All went to the gutter where they belonged. So, I think, this is what is going to happen to present new version of the new General’s ‘real democracy’. Pakistan has lost much during these ‘real democracies’ of generals. Ayub sold three rivers to India and created a sowed seeds of hatred between the two wings of the country. Yahya broke the country in two pieces. Zia further broke the country in many more pieces by creating ethnic and sectarian divides. Now Musharraf is breaking up what is left of it.–ZULFIQAR ALI BUTT, London, UK, via e-mail, March 28. (as published in the Daily Nation, Lahore, Pakistan on March 31st,2007)

Radio-therpy

I was called by my doctor at the Queen's Hospital, Romford, today and briefed about the radio-therpy under which I will be going soon. Touqeer went there with me but he had to wait outside in the car park while I went inside. Doctor has also ordered for test of blood so that he could see as to where the level pf my PSA stands now. My GP had reported it to be at 7.2 but in the USA it was around 11.3.

Our Tragedy

Our tragedy of errors By Shamshad Ahmad WHETHER or not anybody accepts it, we are going through the worst crisis of our history. True, Pakistan has never been without a crisis. In fact, its post-independence political history has been replete with endemic crises and challenges that perhaps no other country in the world has ever experienced. Behind every crisis and every challenge, if there was any one factor, it was the wayward role that the military took upon itself during all these years at the cost of political institutions, constitutional supremacy and its own professional integrity.Military intervention in the state’s political system in the 1950s dealt a severe blow to the democratic process in the country. Since then, Pakistan has virtually remained under siege of its own armed forces and continues to suffer the consequences of protracted spells of military rule in terms of political chaos and socio-economic disarray.We have paid a heavy price during these spells in the form of costly wars, tragic loss of half the country, territorial setbacks, constitutional usurpation, institutional paralysis, provincial disharmony, incessant corruption, general aversion to the rule of law and the resultant erosion of law and order. In recent years, our challenges, both domestic and external, have been proliferating in a manner that has not only complicated things for us beyond redress but also badly damaged our image.With their country reeling under military dictatorship, the people of Pakistan, on their part, remain unsure of their future as an independent nation, and are naturally dismayed at the world community’s total complacency and indifference to their country’s need for freedom, democracy and pluralism which represent an indispensable asset of contemporary civilisation.The sole beneficiary of this system in our country has been the “wilful ruler” who was either “the child of fortune” or was “born into power” or who acquired power through deceit and force. We have also been steadfast in following, since our independence, the Machiavellian concept of “elimination” of political opponents through force and violence, and sans mercy. Tactical manoeuvres have been the key ingredient of our political recipe.Our post-independence history is replete with Machiavellian antics and adventures. We have seen a prime minister assassinated as part of a draconian conspiracy in 1951, another one who was legally selected as governor-general after the Quaid-i-Azam, was first saddled with the office of prime minister and then dismissed in 1953 to be replaced by a “pathetically” pro-American political no-body, another elected prime minister executed by a military dictator in 1979 and the last constitutionally elected prime minister overthrown in a military coup in 1999 and then exiled in a devious manner.The most recent of these examples was the treatment meted out to a ruling Q-League prime minister, the first and the only one from Balochistan, who was disgraced and forced to leave his office to make place for someone more pliable and more saleable to the country of his origin, the United States of America.Coups were always staged on the pretext of a “poor” political culture and calibre. Seeds of disarray were sown in Pakistan’s political arena just to brand the politicians as corrupt and inept players of the game. Almost in every instance, there was someone from the judiciary to provide a “legal” cover to the power play.The all-powerful bureaucratic-military axis has been calling the shots in a perennially unstable and chaotic political environment. They have been installing “political” persons of their choice, and in some cases “imported dual nationality holders” to head the “musical chair” governments in our political carnival. In fact, it has been an endless game of political marionettes presenting to the nation a “tragedy of errors.”For more than half a century, Pakistan has been the scene of this pitiable tragedy which has changed the course of our political and constitutional history, and totally disrupted the democratic process. It took our politicians nine years and several governments to frame our first constitution in 1956 which was abrogated by a military dictator in less than three years.Since then, we have had two constitutions, one promulgated by a Field Marshal President in 1962, and the other adopted by an elected legislature of the truncated Pakistan in 1973, which has since been amended seventeen times leaving very little of the original text in its essence. It is a different constitution altogether. Pakistan is now an archetypal example of the Machiavellian “princedom” in which sovereignty does not reside in the people but is premised on the infamous “doctrine of necessity.”The tragedy of our nation is that democracy was never allowed to flourish in our country. We deviated from our ideals and have been experimenting with systemic aberrations with no parallel in political philosophy or cotemporary history. The closest we could trace something alike is perhaps the Cromwellian era of the seventeenth century known for its assorted political experiments.These included the establishment and dissolution of several parliaments, rule of the force, rule of the saints, establishment and collapse of the “lord protectorate”, military rule and finally Cromwell’s last but unsuccessful attempt in the form of “humble petition and advice” to legalise his power through parliamentary authority.Cromwell was at least conscientious enough to realise that the source of his authority was force, not law. And he died a frustrated man within seven months after he dissolved the last parliament in disgust, having utterly failed in securing any popular basis for his power. Frustration seems to be writ large on some of the recent developments in Pakistan, including removal by the president of the country’s Chief Justice on charges of “misconduct and abuse of power.”Most observers look at this case as politically motivated and believe that the action against the Chief Justice was precipitated by his recent rulings against the government in some of the high-profile cases. These included the blocking of controversial privatisation of Pakistan Steel and a suo motu action against disappearance of hundreds of civilians ordering the government to provide information on the detainees’ whereabouts.These cases had alarmed the president who was counting on the judiciary’s support in his bid for re-election later this year for another five-year term from the same parliament which had “elected” him five years ago and which itself is completing its tenure this year. President Musharraf’s action was seen as a preemptory attempt to eliminate the likely challenge to his political future.This was also a classic case of an extreme risk miscalculation. Musharraf claims to have acted on the advice of his prime minister but in effect, as he subsequently acknowledged, the prime mover of the crisis was none other than the same old Sharifuddin Pirzada who has been associated with every military regime, and whose sole distinction as a lawyer is as the demolisher of the country’s politico-judicial set-up.According to the president, it was he who gave him the first draft of the reference against the Chief Justice leading first to a public indictment of the Chief Justice through a controversial letter by a Supreme Court advocate, and then to his unceremonious removal and unwarranted maltreatment. A political and constitutional crisis now engulfs the country, which, despite Musharraf’s “acknowledgement and rectification” of what he calls “tactical mistakes” is aggravating with public outrage and anger lawyers taking to the streets.The crisis today is no longer over an issue concerning the conduct or misconduct of an individual. It is now over the misconduct of the government which has violated all norms of civilised and constitutional behaviour. Today, not only the judiciary as an independent organ of the state is under assault, but also the media which is under attack.In Pakistan, as in England of the Cromwellian era, fundamental values of freedom, democracy and human dignity have been breached with impunity. Constitutions have been violated in letter and spirit. Institutional paralysis has kept the whole nation disenfranchised. Our feudal power structure has been exploited by successive military dictators to unleash a culture of political opportunism, corruption and ineptitude.History is replete with tales of self-righteous and self-centred rulers who forgot that power never endures and considered their reign as a mere extension of their egos and idiosyncrasies. The seventeenth century French monarch, Louis XIV, was the classic example of this mentality. His famous dictum: "L'etat, c'est moi" ("I am the state") was an expression of arrogance and an affront to the principle of “separation of powers” with its guarantees for the respect of representative national institutions.The finality of those words enunciated with a note of casual self-assurance did speak of the king’s determination to have his way but also showed his contempt for the sovereign will of the people. It is the same contempt that is being shown today to the sovereign will of our people of Pakistan. We are now learning what our military rulers consider to be the limits of their power — nothing.Everyone is anxious to know in what direction the current judicial crisis will take the country, which regrettably is today one of those few states that qualify to be called a “banana republic” and are governed by the “law of tooth and claw.” Pakistan remains listed not only among the world’s top ten dictatorships but also among the sixteen most corrupt countries of the world.Abuse of authority and actions prejudicial to the dignity of public offices are endemic in our entire governmental system. No one, not even those in the highest of places in the political and administrative hierarchy, can claim clean hands. What is needed is a transparent and non-selective accountability which should not be used as a tool of political blackmail and victimisation.It is not the chief justice of Pakistan who is on trial today; it is the whole country which has been put on a trial, and it is Pakistan’s judiciary which now has the most decisive role of our history to play. It owes many past debts to the nation. On its decision will now rest its own future and indeed the very future of Pakistan as a civilised and “civilianised” democratic state with strong and independent institutions. Our tragedy of errors must come to an end now.The writer is a former foreign secretary.

The end of an era !!!!!

The End ........ WITH the death of Ahmed Ali Khan, Pakistani journalism has lost one of its most distinguished pioneers. He joined Dawn in 1946 in Delhi and migrated to Pakistan in 1949. After a stint at The Pakistan Times he went back to Dawn to subsequently become its longest-serving editor. His professional competence was accompanied by an inspiring confidence and an admirable humility. In Pakistan, the journalist faces two great enemies. The first is governmental oppression. The second, at least as devastating, is the apathy of the readers; nothing moves our jaded masses anymore. No report of an injustice, or a wrong or excess does quite the trick. Like a warrior, pensive during a lull in a war, Mr. Khan once wrote “Rarely have I patted myself in the back for any achievement I could claim to have made. But my strenuous engagement in the line of duty has been a labour of love, though punctuated on occasions with a sense of futility. Frustration has often been my reward. And yet sometimes I permit myself the luxury of imagining that journalism does make sense – or did for me

And yet another crisis ! another article of interest.

The Last Chance ..... By Shamshad Ahmad..............In politics, as in every other aspect of life, what people “know” and “understand” largely depends on what they see, hear, and feel and how they think and act. In looking at the unfolding events in our country, and at the acts of our rulers, we see what is not, and see not what is, because all of us accepted to be prisoners of our system find it convenient only to interpret what is easiest to see because we just suppose we have no other alternative.Alas! We are like motionless wooden marionettes singing opera with flapping mouths, which somehow fits with the bizarre dark humour of the medieval ages. Our wooden faces do express the most dramatic of human emotions, lust, jealousy, fear, anger, greed and despair but with a weirdly hilarious quality. For fifty years plus we have been engaged in a puppetry drama in which actors made of flesh merged with actors made of wood producing an endless comedy.But in essence, the actors made of flesh with their feudal and elitist background and military credentials and the actors made of wood with no voice of their own could only present a continuing “tragedy of errors” which has become the fate of Pakistan. A country that came into being in the name of Islam and democracy, and which is still struggling for the essence of both, is currently experiencing yet another squalid drama of its crises-ridden history. The new crisis was precipitated by a reference made last Friday by the President of Pakistan under Article 209 of the Constitution against the country’s chief justice on charges of alleged “misconduct” and “misuse of authority.” This move was no doubt “constitutional” and the president was in his “constitutional” right to have exercised it although questions are being raised on the “constitution” of the supreme judicial council as well as propriety of some of the actions taken by the president including his “meeting” in “uniform” at his “camp office” with the head of Pakistan’s judiciary, one of the three constitutional organs of the state.Apparently, no one, not even his imported prime minister, advised the president that at least for those four or five hours that he was with the chief justice, he could, at least as a gesture of respect for the institution of judiciary, take off his uniform. He would surely not have ceased to hold the office of the president for those few hours. The meeting also could have taken place in camera, not on camera, preferably over a cup of tea in the “civilian” presidency in Islamabad.This would have saved the president many questions on the intent of his “constitutional action” against the chief justice. Also, he would have perhaps also at least appeared to be exercising his constitutional “prerogative” more effectively in greater solemnity and with a transparent dignity owed to the head of the country’s judiciary, an organ which institutionally had always stood behind the very “doctrine of necessity” that keeps him in power today in his uniform.True, the president has no shortage of advisors. But it seems some one “big” from his key advisors was not around. The only one who we discovered was not in Islamabad on that fateful day was our most revered Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the head of the political wing of Musharraf’s ruling “consortium” who had suddenly gone to New York and reportedly there made a “sensational” revelation claiming “he did not have the right to express his views in the matter” because, according to him, “it is an internal matter between the army and the judiciary.”Plato must be turning in his grave. His “philosopher king” has finally surfaced in the twenty-first century version of his ‘utopia” known as the “no-banana republic” of Pakistan. What should the nation make out of Chaudhry Sahib’s statement except preserving it for posterity in the national archives of “golden words” of wisdom and propriety? So, according to him, “it was an internal matter between the army and the judiciary.” There was also a similar piece of deliberate wisdom by another Q league political wizard, the chief minister of Sindh who, overjoyed with the president’s action, claimed that he also had some “displeasure” with the Chief Justice “in certain” matters over which he had sent a complaint to the federal government. As if it was not enough, some of the federal ministers have been busy spreading confusion and complicating the case by making conflicting claims and statements on the chief justice’s treatment. In one case, a federal minister crossed all limits of propriety in an electronic media live event most inappropriate language unbecoming of “the dignity” of his office. No one, however, has yet answered the questions on the treatment meted out to the chief justice over the first two days of his “non-functional” status during which by all independent accounts, he was under “detention” and as he himself has reportedly stated that he was kept “incommunicado” from the outside world and deprived of “normal life” to which an “ordinary” citizen of Pakistan is entitled by his constitutional right.Meanwhile, the crisis has taken its worst toll in terms of turmoil in the country and serious damage to the institution of our judiciary. Pakistan is today a laughing stock of the world. Unfortunately, we are never without a crisis. We, as an independent nation have had more than our share of crises and challenges that perhaps no other country in the world has ever experienced.What ails Pakistan today is not something new. We have seen this before. Only the faces have changed. It has been a constant struggle between power and polity since the very beginning of our independence. Might considered wrong everywhere has always managed itself to be considered “right” in Pakistan. In this process, we have lost half the country and also our “raison d’etat.”We have been deprived of our democratic ethos. Constitutions have been violated in letter and spirit with impunity. Institutional paralysis has kept the whole nation disenfranchised. It is unsure of what its own original rationale was and what it stands for today. Machiavellian “doctrine of necessity,” has been repeatedly “sanctified” to become our political creed. The tragedy of our nation is that democracy was never allowed to flourish in our country. Military intervention in state’s political system in the 1950s dealt severe blow to the democratic process in the country. Since then, Pakistan has virtually remained under siege of its own armed forces and continues to suffer the consequences in terms of political chaos, institutional paralysis and economic uncertainty.What is most embarrassing for the country and the people is the abuse of Quaid’s name by today’s military-sponsored feudal-based ruling combine of all sorts which claims to be a political party headed by a man in uniform. Had he been alive, the Quaid would have never permitted the “military take-over” of his own political party, the Pakistan Muslim League. The Quaid’s soul must already be restive over the contempt shown by the armed forces towards his “edict” asking them not to “meddle” in the country’s politics.Reverting to the current crisis, the matter is now sub judice before the highest legal and constitutional forum of the country. We can only take note of the shoddy backdrop against which this action was taken and the chief justice was made “non-functional”. A highly “controversial” open letter circulated by a Lahore advocate who now says he “wrote” it only because of his “hurt ego,” is said to be the source of this crisis which the outside world sees as “politically-motivated” and “motivatedly timed.”Irrespective of the “constitutionality” questions on the composition of the supreme judicial council, what now matters in this case for an ordinary citizen of the country is not the fate of one individual but the impact of this case on the future of Pakistan’s judiciary as an independent organ of the state and on the “patterns of governance” in Pakistan which are replete with systemic “misuse” of authority and actions “prejudicial” to the dignity of constitutional public offices.One hopes the conduct and practices of our public dignitaries holding constitutional offices including the prime minister and the president will also be above board to ensure propriety and transparency. There are many common instances of “misuse of authority” at that high level and actions prejudicial to the dignity of their high offices. These include use of official planes and transport as well as the whole security and protocol machinery for their private visits to attend private wedding ceremonies, spring festivals, cricket matches, golf championships and “political” party meetings. The excessive protocol and security for VIP office-holders and their indiscriminate use of special aircraft for private purposes is also blatant “misuse of authority.”But in a system, where everyone who is someone in the government, including the prime minister or chief minister can use a special plane and if an IG of a province can have a long motorcade, and if a corps commander can use a BMW, why can’t the chief justice of the apex court claim and enjoy this privilege? Better rationalise the whole system rather than making the selected “misuse” cases for political or personal vendetta.The “power and the privilege” are thriving on patronage, graft, bribery, exertion, influence-peddling, nepotism, fraud and embezzlement. Politicians are also flourishing on campaign contributions, kickbacks, defaulting bank-loans and soft money. “Misuse of authority” in fact is the most common form of corruption in Pakistan, which even NAB despite all its professedly good intentions and resources has failed to purge from the roots of our system. Amazing things happen in Pakistan. Federal secretaries and provincial chief secretaries have been rewarded for their “services” with the same facilities and benefits including residential plots at state expense as admissible to army’s two and three-star generals. This is a glaring example of corruption by privilege. Will somebody now take a suo moto notice of this worst case of abuse of power in our country? The buck must stop somewhere. Meanwhile, the difficulties and sufferings of the poor and the underprivileged remain unattended. They are burdened with liabilities that normally belong to the state. Parents pay teachers illegal fees to have their children educated, patients pay extra to get proper health care, citizens give public officials “gifts” or money to speed up procedures, and drivers bribe police officers to avoid a fine. What many see as simply a way to get things done is, simply and in fact, nothing but a crime. Those of us who care for Pakistan’s “pride and sovereignty” will also agree that there could be nothing more repugnant to the dignity of our “high constitutional offices” than accepting an aircraft “donated” by a foreign government for our VVIP travels abroad. The offices of Pakistan’s president and prime minister epitomise its sovereignty and independence, and are the symbols of our national pride and dignity.Let this “donated” plane be used by PIA for carrying handicapped or under-privileged Hajj pilgrims instead of being inducted in PAF’s VVIP fleet. Pakistan’s state sovereignty and independence is not to be bartered for state gifts from other countries. If our planes are not flight-worthy, why not abandon the Marco Polo culture at state expense, which our leaders from all periods and vantages have adopted as a prerogative of their office. Our problems are domestic, not external, and their solution also lies in Pakistan, in Baluchistan, in Waziristan, and in other underprivileged areas of the country, not in Washington or New York or in London, Brussels or Davos.And finally, let us hope we will ride through the current crisis with confidence and dignity, and restore the institutional integrity in our country through strict adherence with the Constitution. Our options are limited today. We cannot afford any more tragedies and national debacles. These are exceptional times warranting exceptional responses to our problems. We must avoid reaching points of no return. We love our armed forces. They have given countless sacrifices for this country. In order to regain their place in the hearts and minds of our people, they must now take stock of the gravity of the current crisis and return to their constitutional and professional role devoting their undivided attention and energy to defending Pakistan’s independence, security and territorial integrity. Leave the politics and civil governance to the elected representatives of the people. There is no alternative for Pakistan to return to a genuine democracy rooted in the will of the people, constitutional supremacy and institutional integrity, and a culture of political consistency and civilianised body politic. This is now the only and perhaps the last sine qua non for Pakistan’s survival as an independent, strong and stable country as envisioned by our founding fathers. This is the last chance. ..... (as published in the Daily Nation, Lahore, Pakistan, on 15th March/2007)

Worried Tanveer ......

Worried Tanveer, my eldest son in Pakistan, spoke to me on the telephone today and wanted to know about my illness. I had asked Rukshee to tell him about it in a polite manner.

Questions that need answers !!!!

By Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad ..............There are a number of vital questions concerning the developments that started after CJ Ifitikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was made “non functional” that need answers.The first relates to the treatment meted out to him ever since. On Tuesday the Acting CJ told lawyers that Justice Chaudhry was still the Chief Justice of Pakistan. If so, under what law has he been stripped of his powers and privileges and denied the protocol reserved for the man heading the apex court? If he is still the CJ, why was he stopped from proceeding to the Supreme Court on Friday after leaving the President’s Camp Office? A report in a major English daily tells of a strong police force chasing his car and blocking it near Serena hotel from where the CJ was forcibly escorted to his official residence.Who decided, and under what law, to subsequently remove the official flag from his residence and put him under house arrest where he was to remain incommunicado. Only a selected category of people duly approved by the government have been allowed to meet him. He has complained that his children, including a school going infant, have been stopped from proceeding to their respective educational institutions.On Tuesday as the CJ proceeded to the SC for appearance before the Supreme Judicial Council he was roughed up by police, an incident unheard of in any civilised country. Later in the evening the security personnel stationed outside his residence denied access to his counsel despite an assurance from the Acting CJ that the proceedings against Justice Chaudhry would be fair and transparent. It needs to be explained at whose behest actions of the sort which amount to the humiliation of the entire judiciary were taken. Meanwhile the media trial of the CJ continues unabated. On Tuesday the CJ was accused by the Information Minister of acting like a politician. In order to ensure that the inquiry is conducted properly, the Constitution has to be adhered to in letter and spirit. In the present case this requires that the provisions of Article 209 dealing with the Supreme Judicial Council and of Article 180 dealing with the appointment of the Acting Chief Justice are strictly followed. Article 209 requires that when the SJC is conducting inquiry into the capacity or conduct of a SC judge who is a member of the Council, the later is to be replaced by a judge next to him in seniority as a member of the Council. Under the law Justice Chaudhry’s place in the SJC should have been taken by Justice Bhagwandas who is on leave till March 22. Why did the government act in indecent haste by proceeding to form the SJC without waiting for Justice Bhagwandas? CJ Chaudhry maintains that a reference/complaint against another judge is already lying in the record of the SJC. Couldn’t the government have waited for two weeks to initiate proceedings on the reference against CJ Chaudhry? And why did the government decide to appoint an Acting CJ? The constitution envisages only two situations where an appointment of the sort is justified. First, if the judge holding the office is absent. Second, when he is unable to perform the functions of his office for any other reasons. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is in Islamabad and his residence is within walking distance of the Supreme Court. He is physically and mentally fit to attend to his duties and is in fact keen to do so. The problem is that he is being hindered from the performance of his constitutional functions on the untenable ground that an inquiry is being conducted in his conduct. When a President can hold office while impeachment proceedings are launched against him, there is no justification to stop a CJ from performing his normal functions particularly his administrative duties and replace him by a an Acting CJ during a reference. What is the justification to conduct the inquiry in camera when the constitution does not specifically require this. Open trials are conducted to ensure that justice is not only seen but also done. If cases of misuse of authority and corruption can be conducted against former Prime Ministers and publicised what is the justification to exempt a section of society from this? Aren’t all citizens equal before law? In the present case in camera proceedings are all the more questionable. The charges and accusations against the CJ have been leveled openly and publicised in the press. At times they have been aired by government ministers. It would be against natural justice under the circumstances if he is not allowed to defend himself in public. E-mail: azizuddin@nation.com.pk (as published in the Daily Nation, Lahore, Pakistan, on 15th March,2007)

Fear ? Of what !

Fear is the thing ........ troubling the General. Pakistani General’s recent step against the Chief Justice is nothing but an attempt to have a CJ of his choice on his side when his bid for another tenure of presidency is challenged. The present CJ appears to have refused endorsement of such a move. General Zia also had the same fear from CJ Yaqoub Ali Khan while Nawaz Sharif was afraid of CJ Sajjad Ali Shah due to the same reason. Both removed their CJs because of this fear. -ZULFIQAR ALI BUTT, London, UK, via e-mail, March 10. (Daily Nation,Lahore, Pakistan dated 15th March/2007)

MRI scan for prostrate !

I have under gone MRI scan for my prostrate glands enlargement in the King George Hospital in London and soon a schedule for my radio-therpy will be given to me to treat this illness. .......... Rukshee, Sara and Nazish are constently in touch with me. So is Qadeer from Ireland. Tanveer also spoke to me from Pakistan but he does not know as to what type of treatment I am under going and for what illness. I asked Rukshee to tell him politely about my condition so that he knows as to what was going on here in London.

Not good news ........ I went to the Queen's Hospital yesterday (march 7th) but there is no good news for my enlargement of my prostrate glands. My doctors will now decide about my surgery or radiation in the coming week's time. Sarah Butt, my youngest daughter was the first to speak to me from Narowal today. Later it was Rukshee who spoke to me. I have not, up till now, told about it to Touqeer. I hope to tell him soon but I am waiting for a proper time. I, on the same time, don't want Roomina to be disturbed with this serious news as she is in the family way and expecting her third child after nine or tenth week. Lets hope for the best.