Karachi Fire: Resignation not enough

THE FRONTIER POST

Sindh Minister for Commerce and Industries Abdur Rauf Siddiqui tendered his resignation on Friday accepting the responsibility of the inferno at the garments factory at Karachi's Hub River Road that claimed 259 lives in what has been termed as the worst industrial tragedy in the country's history. His resignation, obviously dictated by his parent party in the coalition government, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, followed when investigators combed through closed circuit television footage from inside the ill-fated factory.Mr Siddiqui sent his resignation to the governor, who also happens to from the same party, instead of a normal legal procedure of sending them to the chief minister who is the province's chief executive. However, the resignation is a rare gesture of conceding obligation on the minister's part, yet this is not enough because this would hardly make the difference on the prevent apathy of the provincial officialdom which failed in discharging the legal duty of periodic inspection that used to be the hallmark of regulating the industrial wheel in the past. And what the minister remarked in his parting talk with media is enough to understand that political bosses of Pakistan are not free to act as they are within the discipline of age-old and hackneyed laws and consequently the officialdom. For example, he has no powers to proceed against a defaulting industry except to cancel the allotment of the land on which the factory was established. Revealing that the garments factory had no fire fighting system, which is a responsibility of civil defence which comes under the control of the home department. Besides, the labour department is to implement the Factory Act 1934, forcing employers to adopt precautionary measures to deal with any emergency. But the department failed to inspect the lacking facilities inside the ill-fated factory. What is necessary to avoid future such catastrophes is that all the departments concerned should discharge their duty within their legal framework. For example, the labour department should make sure that its inspectors visit industrial units within the prescribed law to ensure that all units are observing measures set for them in addition to the safety of industrial workers. But what is anomalous in that provincial labour departments have been working under the 1934 enactment although Pakistan should have followed the example of other countries of South Asia which inherited the same colonial law and legislated anew under their objective conditions. Another anomaly, rather illegality, is that the system of periodic labour inspection stands abandoned and labour inspectors are getting their palms greased by factory owners instead of really carrying out the inspection of the facilities and safety equipment provided to the workforce and if the factory's other installations are properly fitted and working. Provinces also need to enact new laws for the proper working of industrial units. At least the 1934 Factory Act needs to be replaced by a law that holds labour inspectors under the obligation of filing periodic safety reports of all industries in the province.