Express Tribune Editorials 21th March 2025

[danish]

Inheritance rights of women
Women's inheritance rights remain a problem area for the government and, more importantly, for women. Despite favourable laws, religious edicts and positive efforts by recent governments, far too many women are deprived of their rights by greedy male relatives hiding behind 'culture' and 'traditions'.


And while enforcement of laws has led to a decrease in the number of cases of women being denied their inheritance outright, there are still many cases of men using workarounds to deprive their female relatives through practices such as chaddar or parchi, where jirgas conspire to force women to take less valuable assets as their share of inheritance. Further complicating matters is that such cases — where some form of inheritance share was given — require more investigation, placing a strain on the already overstretched officials looking into inheritance complaints.

Indeed, women's inheritance rights is an area where there is near unanimous political will to do the right thing, but logistics and funding priorities often get in the way. As we noted, the law is already there, but legislation means little without enforcement, and enforcement means little without a commitment from all sectors of society to uphold the rights of women.

However, activists and campaigners have been heartened by a recent Federal Shariat Court ruling that includes a strong critique of these traditions, explicitly declaring any effort to deny a woman her inheritance rights to be un-Islamic. At the same time, activists, rights groups and the government must work together to ensure that more women are aware of their inheritance rights and their options for legal recourse if someone is denying or undermining their rights.

Courts must also take stronger action, not only against the men defrauding their female relatives but also against so-called 'elders' and community leaders who so brazenly disrespect women and the rule of law under the guise of abhorrent customs.

Sugar profiteering
The government's decision to fix the retail price of sugar at Rs164 per kilogram, 13% higher than its earlier cap, is yet another chapter in the longstanding cycle of hoarding and price manipulation. This cycle plays out the same way every time: sugar exports are allowed under the promise that local prices will remain stable, supply is deliberately restricted, and prices inevitably rise. Instead of cracking down on profiteering, the government negotiates with the very industry responsible for the crisis, ultimately legitimising their tactics.


This is exactly what has happened. When the government permitted the export of 600,000 metric tonnes of sugar last year, it set an ex-factory price of Rs140 per kg and a retail price of Rs145 per kg. Now, after an expected market squeeze, the new ex-factory price has been set at Rs159 per kg, effectively handing a Rs19 per kg windfall to sugar millers.

Sugar millers, repeatedly accused of cartelisation, have once again managed to push prices upward while the government has rubber-stamped the increase. This cycle repeats itself year after year. Each time, the government assures the public that prices will remain under control. Each time, the opposite happens. The state actively facilitates these price hikes under the guise of official pricing mechanisms, ensuring that consumers are left at the mercy of a handful of powerful millers.

The only way to break this cycle is through strict enforcement of anti-hoarding laws. The government must actively monitor sugar stocks and impose severe penalties on millers and traders found guilty of hoarding. Surprise inspections and real-time tracking of sugar production and distribution must become standard practice.

Independent regulatory oversight is equally essential. The Competition Commission of Pakistan must be empowered to take action against hoarders for cartelisation. No single industry should have the power to dictate national pricing policies.


Obstruction of justice
Travesty of justice, unfortunately, is getting to become a new-normal and no eyebrows are being raised. The courts apparently are under the influence of the executive, and things have boiled down to open contempt since the passage of the 26th constitutional amendment. The tier of parallel judiciary imposed in the form of Constitutional Bench at the apex court, superseding of senior judges and inductions on nepotism are now taking a toll. The 'court-packing' by the government is literally decimating the independence of the judiciary. The cases pertaining to opposition members as well as those awaiting a judicial review in public interest are the worst hit as dispensation of timely justice is not around.

The stance taken by Justice Sardar Ijaz Ishaq Khan of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) is a case in point. Justice Khan, by invoking contempt proceedings and seeking a clarification from the Deputy Registrar Judicial and Advocate General, has done the obvious in all solemnity. He rightly questioned the cancellation of his court's cause list and subsequent transfer of a case under his domain pertaining to PTI founder Imran Khan to a larger bench. The learned judge minced no words in observing that court rules did not mention such powers in the office of the Chief Justice, saying it is "tantamount to misleading the court of justice".

The intention behind this 'procedural' arm-twisting was to victimise the imprisoned ex-PM whose lawfully due meetings with his family, friends and clients were being denied, despite the express orders of the court. Justice Khan, thus, was scheduled to hear a complaint filed by PTI's Mashaal Yousafzai against the Adiala Jail superintendent for denying her a similar meeting. The supra-intervention surprised many as ironically neither the state nor the jail superintendent was party to the case, and yet the newly-inducted IHC Chief Justice found it necessary to obstruct its hearing. This speaks of micro-management of litigations and that too despicably from the judges, making it an open and shut case of miscarriage of justice.