Political spirit of the government to combat corruption is okay but reliance on institutions to maintain good governance is the key to this enigma. Our political world is not all negativity. It seems to have some positive aspects as well. It was a good sign that Speaker Asad Qaiser agreeing to the opposition’s demand convened a special sitting of the house and ordered the production of Shahbaz Sharif to enable him to attend the session. Gradually realizing that it does not suit the government now to jeer at or enter into fights with its rivals. PTI MNAs listened to the opposition’s criticism rather serenely. Similarly, Khursheed Shah’s meeting with Shahbaz Sharif in his chamber soon after the latter’s arrival was a pleasant gesture acknowledged by Sharif who thanked Bilawal in his address. He called the action a political revenge. Shah maintained that there was no need to arrest Sharif who was not going to abscond. Khursheed Shah sounded right as the anti-corruption body should perform its functions impartially as a watchdog instead of attacking the government’s political opponents. One should confirm the whole story before reproving a politician. Before talking about Shahbaz Sharif’s children making investment in Turkey and China, there was a need to think over the likely impact of such unconfirmed charges on Pakistan’s relations with its significant allies. Likewise, a minister’s statement that three friendly countries let Pakistan down by attaching unacceptable terms for loans, shouldn’t have been made, which he had to disown later. The social benefits of anti-corruption drive should outweigh the social costs. If we wish for investment in the country and give an impression of attractive Pakistan outside the world, high-handed approach that seems as a revengeful act should be abandoned. Anti-corruption measures that implement the international anti-corruption conventions and national spirit should generate positive social welfare i.e. their benefits should exceed their costs. The government must have a balanced and critical review of the subject for future work. For over ten years, organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Council of Europe, and the United Nations have been helping developing countries adopt measures to fight corruption. Yet the adoption of the anti-corruption measures has had a questionable impact on reducing corruption. Indeed, the studies available on the subject point to little, if any, correlation between the extents to which several countries have adopted measures against corruption and reductions in perceived corruption levels. Qualitative study of work on anti-corruption from our region also fail to find any significant relationship between the adoption of measures aimed at reducing corruption and more corruption related detections and prosecutions rather it adversely impacted economic well-being of these countries and smooth running of government businesses.
To attract investment in country, high-handed approach that seems as revengeful act should be abandoned.