Article 24

Yes, Article 24 of the Constitution of Pakistan. The unbridled obsession of politicians and the media with selected articles of the Constitution, coupled with the title of today's column, likely provoked sufficient curiosity for everyone holding the newspaper to be reading these words and perhaps by now everyone is sitting on the edge of their chairs brimming with suspense and intrigue. That is the sole reason why now was deemed to be the most opportune time to highlight Article 24.
What is rather amusing is that till very recent times most everyone didn't know what the Constitution looked like, let alone having read it, and more importantly what it meant to actually have a Constitution; although the later probably is still completely hazy. Excluding lawyers who have been involved in constitutional litigation, to venture a wild guess, the total number of people who have read the entire document and actually understand it can perhaps be counted on fingers. Although, at the same time, some Articles of the constitution have, however, become quite famous.
Article 6 at this point in time leads the lot, and has embraced infamy simply because everybody seems to have a different interpretation of what it means. This happened because various segments of the society, driven by their respective and sometimes, in fact mostly, contrasting agendas, arrived at conclusions, which best served their purpose. Article 6, by now has been debated to death and by the time the underlying need to microscopically analyse 6 is no more, if that ever happens, Article 6 might not even recognise itself in the mirror.
And before Article 6, there were the brothers 62 and 63 who achieved notoriety during elections; does anyone even remember them today. Beyond the numbers and titles, how many actually read these Articles, kindly raise your hands.... is there no one?
Yes there were few other Articles fortunate enough to steal the limelight for a little while, but frankly, can't even remember why and for what. Unfortunately, none of these famous Articles, in spite of all this attention, succeeded in attaining their raison d'être, which really raises doubts if they were appropriately conceived in the first place. If a law cannot be implemented, repeatedly quoting it at various forums is an inexplicable mystery; well perhaps everyone has nothing better to do!
Another such Article, which seemingly has been ignored since 1973 is 24; definitely the single most important Article affecting Pakistan's economy, and arguably, at least for some, the most important Article in the Constitution when it comes to Rule of Law. Although once again Rule of Law is another alien concept in Pakistan and some of the debates on what exactly is meant by the Rule of Law are rather amusing; more on that another time.
So what is Article 24? Well it is titled "Protection of property rights", and the wordings of the first clause, reproduced below, alone should convince the majority as to why Article 24 is "Numero Uno".
No person shall be deprived of his property save in accordance with law. And the second clause and sentence continues to drive the point home. No property shall be compulsorily acquired or taken possession of save for public purposes, and save by the authority of law.
Read any economic thesis, publication, book, theory and what not, and all of them will clearly establish that Rule of Law from an economic perspective means enforcement of property rights and contracts enforcement. And why are property rights so crucial to economists? Simply because property rights are the edifice on which capitalism stands; if the populace is unconvinced about the safety of its assets and property, it will not be interested in acquiring assets, which would ultimately completely terminate any initiative for growth. Remember all the hype about China imitating capitalistic policies and recall the famous Deng Xiaoping quote, "Let some people get rich first"; people get rich when they own property which is why property, rights matter.
In modern times, capital is arguably the key factor of production, and a country can only unlock its entire stock of available capital, and consequently the economy's true potential, by ensuring that property rights are sacrosanct. Financial institutions are only willing to lend when collaterals can be exercised in courts and property owners enjoy enforceable valid titles; which by the way is another travesty needing attention, albeit some other time. In Pakistan rural property is never accepted as collateral and in fact the Central Bank itself forbids such practises; which instructions seem to be contradictory of Article 24, considering that it is the government's duty to protect property rights.
Although there should not be any need to explain why property rights are controversial in Pakistan, the reasons are touched upon solely to ensure the completeness of the article. The one and only reason is that Dewani litigations can take decades to come to a resolution, and not necessarily come out sunny side up! For those who remain unaware, property disputes in Pakistan are heard by what are called the Dewani courts, and note that the English meaning of the word Dewani, in this context, is "that which leads to insanity". Justice delayed is justice denied and in the case of property disputes the right metaphor is the Wild West; remember the much repeated dictum, possession is 90% of ownership, except why have title deeds than! In such an environment, the mighty can appropriate lands at will, and it is well neigh impossible, in fact prohibitive considering costs alone, for the poor to pursue their rights in Dewani courts. And all this is happening in spite of Article 24.
The bigger mystery, well in reality a universally known secret, is why haven't the movers and shakers, which include the media, the legislators, the elite in fact the entire upper echelons of the society, ever pursued the implementation of Article 24 in spirit and in form. What is more remarkable is that even the multilateral lending agencies, armed with the best economists in the world, have never raised such a core issue in their negotiations, and nowhere does the structural programme even touch upon the deplorable state of property right legislation.
The humble objective today was simply to make Article 24 famous in the hope that is the Article which achieves nirvana.
(The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the newspaper)