Enforcement of foreign decrees Part 2

Question Presented

We have been asked to opine on whether there are reciprocal enforcement agreements between Pakistan and England under Pakistani law; and how difficult enforcement of a monetary/costs judgment in Pakistan is in light of the processes that need to be undertaken. The background, briefly, is that our partner law firm in United Kingdom is acting for a defendant in a litigation and intends to apply for an order for security against costs presumably under 25.13 of the Rules and Practice directions of the Civil Procedure Rules in the United Kingdom.

Short Answer

Under Pakistani law, Section 44-A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (the “CPC”) caters specifically to the question of judgments passed by “superior courts” in reciprocating states and especially the United Kingdom (which reciprocates through Foreign Judgments Reciprocal Enforcement Act 1933). Section 44-A of the CPC however is subject to Section 13 of the CPC which sets out the broad exceptions to such enforcement. This makes the execution process cumbersome and time consuming. Case law also has ousted the operation of Order XXI Rule 23-A of the CPC which provided for decretal amount to be deposited as security for filing of objections against such execution.  It may also be stated that Pakistan is not a signatory to any of the conventions specifically mentioned under 25.13 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Rules and Practice Directions in the United Kingdom.

Discussion

At the outset it must be stated the aforesaid Section 44-A of the CPC defines “Superior Court” in reference to United Kingdom as “High Court in England, Court of Sessions in Scotland,  High Court in Northern Ireland, the Court of Chancery of County Palatine of Lancaster and the Court of Chancery of County Palatine of Durham.”  Therefore if the litigation referred to the question pertains to a lower court in England, there is no reciprocal enforcement.  This memorandum assumes that the said litigation is taking place in the High Court of England or the Courts of Chancery as aforesaid (the question refers to England and not United Kingdom). 

Section 44-A of the CPC has been described as a self-contained and independent provision with the Honourable Sindh High Court in the case of Abdul Malik Badruddin v. Grosvenor Casino Limited PLD 1993 Karachi 449 (hereinafter the “Grosvenor Case”) stating that the procedure of the execution is contained in sub-sections (2) and (3) of the said provision. Therefore in Grosvenor Case, the Honourable Sindh High Court ruled that provision of Order XXI Rule 23-A does not apply to foreign judgments.  Order XXI Rule 23-A provides for the deposit of decretal amount in the event that a judgment debtor seeks to file objections against execution of a decree. By ousting the operation of this rule in foreign judgments, the door has been flung open for a judgment debtor to file objections without having to deposit a judgment amount as security. The judgment in the Grosvenor Case also held that a foreign judgment or decree does not operate proprio vigore in Pakistan and is therefore not capable of automatic execution. This means that at some point the local “District Court” (which is held to be a court of original civil jurisdiction) may look at the merits of the judgment.

The objections that have specifically been allowed by Section 44-A of the CPC are exception or objections contained in Section 13 (a) through (f) of the CPC.  The first objection is that a judgment has not been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.  The second objection is that the judgment has not been passed on merits. The second objection gives the executing court the power to determine the facts leading to the foreign judgment de novo. The third objection is that the judgment was based on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognize Pakistan’s law in cases in which such law was applicable. Here again, a question of law is to be determined by the executing court. The fourth objection is that judgment was obtained as a result of proceedings that were contrary to principles of natural justice. The fifth objection is that the judgment was obtained through fraud and the final objection is that the judgment sustains a claim that breaches a Pakistani law. All of these objections require judicial application of mind and require the court to call evidence and try the matter anew. Given that Order XXI Rule 23-A does not apply, it becomes extremely easy for a judgment debtor to indefinitely delay and even frustrate the foreign judgment or in this case the UK judgment. Subsection 3 of Section 44-A of the CPC states clearly that the executing court may refuse execution if it is satisfied that any of the exceptions or objections contained in Section 13 of the CPC apply. The execution is also subject to appeal and as a whole the process may take up to two years or more to complete, which may be an additional consideration given that the issue at hand pertains to a judgment on costs.

It may additionally be stated that under subsection 2 of 25.13 of the Civil Procedure Rules of United Kingdom, an order for security for costs may be made “if the resident out of the jurisdiction; but not resident in a Brussels Contracting State, a State bound by the Lugano Convention, a State bound by the 2005 Hague Convention or a Regulation State, as defined in section 1(3) of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982”. Pakistan is not a signatory or a contracting to any of the aforesaid conventions.

Conclusion

In view of the foregoing it is clear that despite a reciprocal enforcement provision under Section 44-A of CPC, the enforcement of a monetary or a costs judgment in Pakistan is difficult, time consuming and cumbersome. The execution is to be carried on the original civil side and will be subject to further delays due to appeals. Additionally Pakistan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on Choice of Courts, 2005 and is not a regulation state as defined by applicable law in the United Kingdom. It is, therefore, recommended that an application for security under Rule 25.13 as aforesaid may kindly be made in the said litigation to best secure the interests of the client.

Enforcement of foreign decrees Part 1

Question Presented: The client is a UAE based company (“Our Client”) which entered into a contract with Messrs. AB Associates (“AB Associates”), a Pakistan based company, for preparation of a master plan as part of an overall consultancy assignment (“Assignment”). The purpose of the Assignment is to assist the land development authority in Sialkot (“SDA”). Our Client has fulfilled its contractual obligations and has invoiced AB Associates accordingly in addition to sending them multiple reminders through emails and phone calls. Our Client has also sent a legal notice to which AB Associates responded by saying that they entered into an arbitration proceeding against SDA and will pay Our Client once SDA pays them. Nothing in the agreement between Our Client and AB Associates stipulates that Our Client’s remuneration is contingent upon payment from SDA or any third party. Our Client and AB Associates also agreed that governing law and construction of the agreement will be in accordance with UAE Law and that in the event that a dispute cannot be resolved through negotiation, courts at Dubai will have the jurisdiction to settle the same. The question in a nutshell before us is whether or not Pakistani courts will consider the governing law clause in the agreement null and void.

Short Answer:  Pakistani courts will not declare the governing law clause null and void but will instead give it effect as an arbitration clause. The Pakistani courts will treat any judgment by the courts in Dubai as a foreign arbitral award and as such this judgment would be enforceable through the courts in Pakistan.

Discussion:  Pakistani law of contract is the Contract Act of 1872 (the “Contract Act”), which will be the curial law in the event that such an issue is brought before a Pakistani court at any time. The Contract Act essentially codifies the English law of contract. There is an explicit recognition of the principles most germane to the idea of the “freedom of contract”. Case law in Pakistan has recognized this freedom of contract in numerous pronouncements and this is considered, therefore, a trite legal position. The parties in this instance, i.e. Our Client and AB Associates, chose of their own volition the law of UAE to govern the contract. This is permissible under choice of laws principles which are implied in English law of contract (the principles of which have been codified in the Contract Act). Halsbury’s Laws of England state that “where parties expressly stipulate that the contract shall be governed by a particular law, that law will be the proper law of the contract provided the selection is bona fide and there is no objection on ground of public policy and, apparently, even where the law has no real connection with the contract.”[1]

 Similarly the parties chose courts at Dubai for referral of disputes that they are unable to resolve through mutual negotiation. It must also be noted that there is no specific reference to arbitration. There is also the ancillary issue of whether or not the contract was performed in Pakistan. It is important to deal with this canard at the outset. The contract was most likely performed both in Pakistan and the UAE but this is of no consequence to the question before us as becomes clear from aforementioned Halsbury quote. Similarly the idea of balance of convenience has no application in the instant issue because both parties entered into the agreement willingly.

Section 28 of the Contract Act in my view provides us ample guidance on issues of jurisdiction and governing law. Section 28 states:

“Agreement in restraint of legal proceedings void. Every agreement, by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under or in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in ordinary tribunals or which limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights, is void to that extent.

 Exception 1. Saving of contract to refer to arbitration dispute that may arise- This section shall not render illegal a contract by which two or more persons agree that any dispute which may arise between them in respect of any subject or class of subjects shall be referred to arbitration and that only the amount awarded in such arbitration shall be recoverable in respect of the dispute so referred. When such contract has been made, a suit may be brought for its specific performance, and if a suit, other than for such specific performance, or for recovery of the amount so awarded, is brought by one party to such contract against any other subject which they have so agreed to refer, the existence of such contract shall be a bar to the suit.

Exception 2. Saving of contract to refer questions that have already arisen- Nor shall this section render illegal any contract in writing, by which two or more persons agree to refer to arbitration any question between them which has already arisen, or affect any provision of any law in force for the time being as to references to arbitration.”[2]

Examining the operation of Section 28 (and its exceptions) of the Contract Act, the Supreme Court of Pakistan held in the case of M A Chowdhury v. Mitsui OSK Lines Limited, PLD 1970 SC 373[3] that in order to preserve “the sanctity of contracts it ought also be held that such foreign jurisdiction clauses, even when they purport to give jurisdiction to a Court in a foreign country, are really in the nature of arbitration clauses which come within the exceptions to Section 28 and therefore should be dealt with in the same manner as other arbitration clauses”. It was further held that the party which seeks to invoke the foreign jurisdiction clause should ordinarily satisfy the court that it is just and equitable to bind the parties to their bargain i.e. in this case their decision to choose court at Dubai in UAE for dispute resolution.  Another case that may be referred to, strictly as persuasive precedent, is Swedish East Asia Company Ltd v. B.P. Herman and Mohatta (India) AIR 1962 Cal 601[4] where the Calcutta High Court stayed a suit in India where Swedish law was designated as the governing law and Swedish courts were designated as the chosen forum for dispute resolution.

It may be noted here that the assumption is that no exclusive jurisdiction is vested in courts at Dubai. Section 28 supra therefore recognizes the basic principle that parties to a lis cannot confer jurisdiction on a court that does not possess any and cannot divest jurisdiction from a court that does. However when read in light of the aforesaid MA Chowdhury Case, it becomes abundantly clear that even exclusive jurisdiction may be conferred on a jurisdiction in the nature of an arbitration agreement. Therefore it follows that a Pakistani court would likely respect the contractual term and accept the laws of UAE as the governing law of the agreement.

 Pakistani courts will get involved in the enforcement of the judgment which will be treated as an arbitral award. Pakistan promulgated “The Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Ordinance in 2005 (which was re-promulgated in 2007), thereby putting in force the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Therefore, a Pakistani court is bound to enforce the judgment of the courts at Dubai as if it were a judgment of a court in Pakistan.

Conclusion: The governing law clause of the agreement between Our Client and AB Associates is not likely to be declared null and void by Pakistani courts.

---

[1] Halsbury's Laws of England (Lord Simond's Edn.), (3rd Edn.), Vol. 7

[2] Mahmood, M,  Contract Act of 1872, Commentary, 4^th Edition published by Al Qanoon Publishers

[3] PLD 1970 SC 373

[4] http://indiankanoon.org/doc/882120/ accessed on 6 January 2016

Anusha Rahman's Faux Pas: "We can ban google if ..."

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

If there was any hope or optimism that one had associated with this current Nawaz Sharif govt, Anusha Rahman's statement widely reported on Sunday ended it. Here is a corporate lawyer with telecom expertise making possibly the most ignorant and illogical statement yet. What then can one expect from the rest of the maja sajas who have come to power in the current regime?

Pity of Twitterati: Dr. Ayesha Jalal, Manto, Jinnah and us

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

First the obvious question: Why is this on my law blog? Well because I am a lawyer.

Next. Here is a short story from Manto for our readers:
Pathanistan
Khu, speak out immediately. Who are you?'
'I.... I....'
'Son of Satan, speak speak, speak! Are you an Indu (Hindu) or a Muslimeen (Muslim)?'
'Muslimeen.'
'Khu, who is your Prophet?'
'Mohammad Khan.'
'That's right, go.'
(Saadat Hassan Manto)

English and Nordic Models of Secularism

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

My earliest understanding of secularism was rooted in the first amendment to the US Constitution while studying in the US. It is the most impressive dictum - a wall of separation between religion and state. The US never had a state church. Its tradition of separation of church and state went back to the founding of Rhode Island which was based on this principle. The Turkish model - especially after Kemal Ataturk's famous 6 day speech - which abolished state religion in 1928 (though initially the Turkish Republic defined Islam as the state religion at Ataturk's behest) also seemed to follow the American and more closely the French models of secularism. The difference between American and French (and Turkish) models was that the latter was an ideology of the state whereby religion was pushed out and not left alone.

Elections 2013 - the end of ANP's identity politics in KPK?

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

In 2008 ANP's victory in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and its subsequent alliance with PPP at the center had mistakenly been seen as a victory for Pushtun Nationalism. That myth was burst in May 2013, just as the myth of MMA's Islamist politics had exploded earlier. The people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pushtun and Non-Pushtun, religious or non-religious, have proved yet again that they are not swayed by emotional slogans. After all if identity politics was what it was all about the renaming of NWFP as KPK should have been considered a major feather in the cap of ANP. The people of KPK, while proud of their new name which was an important corrective in Pakistani history, voted PTI because ANP's government from 2008-2013 was a spectacular failure on every count.

Jinnah's Pakistan: Calling a spade a spade

This relates to Mr Yaqoob Bangash's historically inaccurate article in Express Tribune on the captioned matter.  

It is well known that Jinnah's Muslim League included Ismailis, Shias, Sunnis, Ahmadis etc and therefore the question of defining a Muslim did not arise. In fact Jinnah expressly ruled out the idea when he was pressurised on Ahmadi question. To Mr. Jinnah a Muslim was a person who professed to be a Muslim. Similarly Jinnah never declared Muslims outside the League to be Non-Muslim. His claim that Muslim League represented the Muslims was borne out of his desire to negotiate with the Congress at a level of parity. He never suggested people outside the League were non-Muslims. In fact it was Majlis-e-Ahrar and other Congress allies which declared Jinnah to be a Non-Muslim for being too secular, too westernised and soft on Ahmadis. A mere reading of the Munir Report will prove my point.  Similarly 11 August is not the only speech that Jinnah gave which gave an inclusive democratic vision. There were many others and these are easily searchable. This one speech mantra is historically inaccurate. Finally Jinnah's actions as Governor General were driven by the fact that on 22 August 1947, the Khan sb ministry enjoyed the support of only 16 members out of a house of 39. His action was completely constitutional. 

I do not know what Jinnah's Pakistan is but Jinnah the man was not born on 23 March 1940. He had spent 4 decades in politics most of which was dedicated to civil liberties, equality and religious freedom for all Indians. 

Mr. Bangash unfortunately has slandered the memory of the one man whose wise words we need to follow at this critical juncture in our history.  What private griefs they harbor, one cannot say, but distorting history is hardly the way to go about it.

Click here for my detailed rebuttal.

Lord Tariq Ahmad and the Pakistani Media

By Yasser Latif Hamdani


So mainstream Pakistani media is reporting that His Excellency, President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari  was received by Lord Tariq Ahmed who is of Pakistani origin. The News especially seems to have made a big deal about the fact that it is the first time a peer of Pakistani origin has received a president on behalf of the Queen.

What our media omitted is that Lord Ahmed is an Ahmadi, a community that is terribly persecuted, abused and humiliated by the state and society in Pakistan. A diplomat once asked me if the discrimination against Ahmadis is a popular discrimination. It is a populist discrimination I told him. It is a denial of human rights and individual freedoms. You may amount to nothing in life, you may be a soulless and corrupt human being but so long as you are an officially sanctioned "Muslim" in Pakistan, you have a copyright on Islam and using that copyright you can justify anything done against Ahmadis.

Shame!

Is Pakistan like 16th Century England?

Is Pakistan like 16th Century England. I endeavoured to answer this question in my latest article in Daily Times. I think there is hope still for Pakistan because our social and material conditions are very similar to Europe during reformation, especially England. There have been monumental changes made that will take their effect in good time.

The coming elections will be decisive in the sense that they would determine whether Pakistanis are willing to allow democracy to work or not. In the opinion of this writer, it is very important for democracy, Pakistan and Pakistan People’s Party itself that the PPP loses the next election — which it seems poised to do — so that people get to vote out an unpopular government and the PPP goes back to the drawing board to reinvent itself as a true people’s party. Such a defeat will be a reminder to whoever is in the saddle next that there is no mightier sword than the sword of public opinion that the people have forged in this country primarily through their own effort and their faith in democracy.

Imran Khan Najam Sethi Aapis Ki Baat - My take

This is a non-law related post.

Imran Khan's appearance on Najam Sethi's show shattered some of the in-vogue myths about the great man and only anchor as suave and a commentator as shrewd as Najam Sethi could have brought out the very essence of the man- a liberal progressive man who nonetheless derives his inspiration from Islam, a man who is patriotic but is not a war-monger, a man who wants Pakistan to co-exist with the rest of the world with honour, dignity and on the basis of mutual respect and a man who wants all citizens of Pakistan to live honorably regardless of their creed or personal background. For those of us who are inspired by Jinnah and Jinnah's idea of a progressive democratic egalitarian and inclusive Pakistan, this was the stuff of dreams.

Nothing is right with Pakistan's so called "feminists"

In response to my blog post Pakistan's so called "feminists", author/novelist/blogger Bina Shah posted this response. While I thank her for her acknowledgement of my enthusiasm for women's rights, I was disappointed to read what was yet another long winded apology for why the women's movement has failed so miserably in Pakistan. The answer to that question I had already suggested in my previous blog/article. The reason why the women's movement will remain grounded for all times to come is because the so called standard bearers of the women's movement are unwilling and unable to look beyond biology and find allies. In fact I am afraid if they critically analyse their actions, they'll realize that they have a lot in common with the Mullahs. For example consider this brilliant message from an angry angry self styled Pakistani feminist, apparently in New York, addressed to me:

Pakistan's so called "Feminists"

Imagine waging a grand struggle for something for 30 odd years and still being unable to make even a small incremental change towards your goal. Pakistan’s so-called feminist movement is a story of foibles, missed opportunities, humongous egos and personal enrichment. Meanwhile, in Pakistan, a woman’s testimony is considered half that of a man in terms of financial transactions, and Hudood Laws for all intents and purposes continue to infringe upon women’s personal freedoms. The little progress that women have made, and it is pathetically little, over the last 30 years has come from outside the influence of the cabal of feminist activists. In fact, at every opportunity, these feminists have tried to bring down people who have tried to speak for women’s rights and equality from a non-gender based perspective on the basis of equality of citizenship regardless of gender.

Aisha Sarwari's speech at Faith Matters

Speech at Faith Matters Launch in Pakistan

Delivered on November 4th 2012 at Avari Hotel
I’d like to begin by thanking Faith Matters and its leadership, for inviting me to speak on this very important topic of interfaith harmony in Pakistan, and in particular between the Christian and Muslim communities. The work that is being done on this platform is commendable because we’ve got far too many examples of groups attempting to dehumanize the “other,” and very few that work on the premise that change is possible in civil society in Pakistan.

One man's Qadri, Other man's Kafir

From the Daily Times

One man's Qadri is another man's kafir — Yasser Latif Hamdani

Who amongst us will decide who is a good Muslim and who is not a good Muslim? Whose definition of Muslim will be accepted? Dr Qadri's? Or Mumtaz Qadri's?

The first and foremost thing that one must point out about the way the Qadri long march ended is that Pakistan’s constitutional and democratic system is now firmly rooted and cannot be shaken by protest marches and massing of crowds in the capital. For this, one must salute the government as well as the opposition. Credit must also be given to the government for dealing with the march without resorting to any heavy-handed tactics, while also protecting the participants of the march from any untoward activity such as a terrorist attacks.

Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea

Pakistan is today a deeply divided society with two polar extremes of ignorance pounding at it day in and day out
There are some things that need to be stated clearly and unwaveringly. Tarek Fatah, the self-proclaimed mouthpiece of progressive and liberal Muslims of Canada (a claim that many progressives strongly dispute, it must be added), is one of the most intellectually confused people around in my opinion. More recently, he has taken to making unsubstantiated claims about Pakistan. Now my readers know very well that there is hardly anyone more critical of Pakistan’s multiple failures as a nation and a state than me. Those who want a reminder need to dig up my articles in this newspaper in the last two years. My criticism arises out of a genuine concern as a Pakistani worried about the future of this country and not in form of platitudes of self-importance that Mr Fatah and company have routinely inflicted upon their readers.

Jinnah's Nationality and Oath

Truth be told, the MQM chief Altaf Hussain’s much anticipated drone attack landed on the xenophobia and narrow-mindedness of Pakistanis. Every anti-MQM politician rushed in to defend the honour of the Quaid-e-Azam after feeling slighted that Altaf Hussain had claimed that Jinnah was a subject of the British crown and as Governor-General had taken the oath of allegiance to the crown.
The discussion that ensued was as amusing as it was downright ignorant. Tarek Fatah, a self- styled Jinnah-basher, came up with the claim that unlike Jinnah, India’s Prime Minister Nehru had not taken allegiance to the crown, which was as baseless an assertion as by those on our right wing crying foul over Altaf Hussain’s comments. Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was the Prime Minister of the Dominion of India, which was a constitutional monarchy between 1948-1950 and not only did he take an oath of allegiance to the crown, it was administered by the King’s own cousin. The oath of allegiance for Governor-Generals, ministers and governors is found in the Independence of India Act, 1947. The question can be settled by looking at item 179 on page 276 of the Jinnah Papers, Volume IV, which contains the different kinds of oaths for the governor general, governors, ministers, etc. Ironically, in all of India, it was only Jinnah that insisted that King George stopped signing his name George R I or Rex Imperica.

Supreme Court's judicial activism now seeks another victim : Raja Pervez Ashraf

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

I hold no brief for the Prime Minister of Pakistan. He may be completely corrupt. However I do have a problem with our Supreme Court ordering his arrest when a bunch of hooligans have laid siege to the capital.  In other news- Karachi Stock Exchange crashed - you guessed it- as a result of this ill-timed and ill-advised order by the Supreme Court.

In Pakistan nothing is unscripted. That is our tragedy. Powers that be have scripted our decline through out. Now see as we fall to yet another depth of national humiliation and ignominy.

Judicial Activism may have been coined to describe US Supreme Court's eagerness to protect and expand the civil rights of US citizens, but in Pakistan Judicial Activism will prove to be the death knell of our state.

Conspiracy Theories

Monday, December 31, 2012 COMMENT : General Zia’s children and their conspiracy theories — Yasser Latif Hamdani Why does it not bother anyone that our constitutional fundamental rights are trampled on a daily basis by the wretched deep state? Renowned physicist and author Stephen Hawking once wrote that while everything is predetermined, there is no way to predict what is predetermined and, therefore, the illusory idea of free will is a workable model. In other words, there is a grand design but the details of this design are not known. I am not a physicist or a philosopher of science so I cannot comment on the scientific veracity of this claim. What I do know is that this idea is equally applicable to how we look at the world, its politics and economic systems. Last week I met two recent graduates, one from LUMS and the other from FAST, both prestigious institutions of higher learning in Lahore. What they had to say terrified, amused and angered me, beginning with freemasons who controlled the world to the 9/11 World Trade Centre attacks being the CIA’s work through remotely controlled drones. They told me about the Knights Templar, the Knights of Malta and about the quest for the Holy Grail. I was further inundated with information about the US hoarding gold in Fort Knox and the grand design to dominate the world by a handful of 33-degree Freemasons. I was also informed that all US presidents are freemasons though they were not completely sure if Mr Obama fits the bill (because they told me that Freemasons is an exclusively white male club). In short, it was a thoroughly entertaining but at times disturbing conversation.

Punjab's Chief Minister

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

Thanks to the three on average traffic jams caused by the Punjab government that an average person encounters on the way back from office, one has endless time on one’s hands with nothing to do. I like to pass the time by observing motorcyclists making their way between cars, in flagrant disregard of all traffic laws. Now I do not wish to sit in judgment on our bi-wheelers as many laws are broken by almost all kinds of vehicle. A profound lack of respect for authority and law is what characterises us as a nation.

Counterfeit coins

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

The grand old man of Jinnah’s Pakistan, the unparalleled Ardeshir Cowasjee, died last month. This great secular urban citizen of Pakistan has managed to blaze quite a trail for those who still want to see this country prosper and reclaim Jinnah’s idealism for Pakistan. Unfortunately, there continues to be no realisation of the precipice our deviation from Jinnah’s vision of a secular state has brought us to. Naysayers on both the right and the left continue to bulldose the memory of Mr Jinnah for their own petty self-interests. Cowasjee rescued the idea of Jinnah’s Pakistan from oblivion but, unfortunately, one Cowasjee is not enough to counter the tomes of misrepresentation that have passed for historical works in Pakistan.