Loud Thinking

Archive for 2013

Life isn’t about how to survive the storm, but how to dance in the rain.

“Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don’t matter, and those who matter don’t mind.”

— Bernard M. Baruch

“If you don’t stretch your limits — you’ll set your limits.”

Helping-Others is to give aid or support to those in need.

“To strengthen the muscles of your heart, the best exercise is lifting someone else’s spirit whenever you can.”

Pervaiz Musharraf Government’s PTCL Sale to Etisalat Telecom Falls Under the Odious Transaction

Pervaiz Musharraf’s government sold the Pakistani gold mine company PTCL, to Etisalat Telecom of UAE, with mind boggling condition of transferring 100% physical assets on just 26% share holding of PTCL, that too on pay as you earn basis.

Never ever in the history of the world any government has sold its precious assets on such a throw away terms, to a foreign company.

As such, this deal clearly falls under the ODIOUS transaction.

Moreover, Etisalat Telecom is also a defaulter of mind boggling huge amount of $800 million to the GOP since about last 8-10 years.

Therefore, in the Pakistan’s national interest this PTCL sale deed with Etisalat Telecom should be cancelled and all their foreign executives posted in Pakistan be allowed to leave only after clearance of all dues with accrued interest, by the company.

Why can’t Pakistan repudiate its odious debts (when America has already done it) and odious PTCL deal with Etisalat?

Odious debt : Definition In international law, odious debt, also known as illegitimate debt, is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion.

Implementation history of odious debt.

The doctrine was formalised in a 1927 treatise by Alexander Nahum Sack, a Russian émigré legal theorist, based upon 19th-century precedents including Mexico’s repudiation of debts incurred by Emperor Maximilian’s regime, and the denial by the United States of Cuban liability for debts incurred by the Spanish colonial regime.

According to Alexander Nahum Sack: When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state.

This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime.

The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfil one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State.

Odious debts, contracted and utilised for purposes which, to the lenders’ knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded.

The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler.

Why can’t Pakistan repudiate its odious debts (when America has already done it) and odious PTCL deal with Etisalat?

Odious debt : Definition

In international law, odious debt, also known as illegitimate debt, is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion.

Implementation history of odious debt.

The doctrine was formalized in a 1927 treatise by Alexander Nahum Sack,[1] a Russian émigré legal theorist, based upon 19th-century precedents including Mexico’s repudiation of debts incurred by Emperor Maximilian’s regime, and the denial by the United States of Cuban liability for debts incurred by the Spanish colonial regime.

According to Sack:

When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfil one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilised for purposes which, to the lenders’ knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler.

Mr. Ishaq Dar since you are under oath to serve Pakistan, we trust your personal relations with the UAE rulers will not come in the way of your duty towards your motherland

Mr. Ishaq Dar, as you know, Musharraf government sold the Pakistani gold mine company PTCL, to Etisalat Telecom of UAE, with mind boggling condition of transferring 100% physical assets on just 26% share holding of PTCL, that too on pay as you earn basis.

Never ever in the history of the world any government has sold its precious assets on such a throw away terms, to a foreign company.

As such, this deal clearly falls under the ODIOUS transaction.

Moreover, Etisalat Telecom is also a defaulter of mind boggling huge amount of $800 million to the GOP since about last 8-10 years. Therefore, in the national interest this PTCL sale deed with Etisalat Telecom should be cancelled and all their foreign executives posted in Pakistan be detained and only released after clearance of all dues with accrued interest by the company.

Mr. Ishaq Dar since you are under oath to serve Pakistan, we trust your personal relations with the UAE rulers will not come in the way of your duty towards your motherland.

Mr. Ishaq Dar, as you know, Musharraf government sold the Pakistani gold mine company PTCL, to Etisalat Telecom of UAE, with mind boggling condition of transferring 100% physical assets on just 26% share holding of PTCL, that too on pay as you earn basis.

Never ever in the history of the world any government has sold its precious assets on such throw away terms, to a foreign company.

As such, this deal clearly falls under the ODIOUS transaction.

Moreover, Etisalat Telecom is also a defaulter of mind boggling huge amount of $800 million to the GOP since about last 8-10 years. Therefore, in the national interest this PTCL sale deed with Etisalat Telecom should be cancelled and all their foreign executives posted in Pakistan be detained and only released after clearance of all dues with accrued interest by the company.

Mr. Ishaq Dar since you are under oath to serve Pakistan, we trust your personal relations with the UAE rulers will not come in the way of your duty towards your motherland.

Two proposals for generating funds for the Shaukat Khanam Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Center.

I have two proposals. Firstly, as is the practise in the UK, any charity by an employee is equally matched and the same amount is donated by the employer for that specific organisation.
Please consider to cultivate the same culture in Pakistan. Secondly, souvenirs of SKMCH & RC should be available for the purchase of the general public throughout the country and abroad including Afghanistan.