APROPOS the letter, `Sindh govt clarification` (June 23). Unfortunately, the distinction between democratic government and dictatorship has been blurred. Instead of upholding democratic norms where dissent is heard and tolerated, our democratic governments tend to show extreme reaction even to healthy criticism basedonfacts andhgures.

Initially it appeared the Sindh Chief Minister was quite serious about education as he, taking the reins of the provincial government, announced an `education emergency`. This was an implicit admission of the public education system`s f ailure. I did not twist any f acts, so the Sindh government should have welcomed the article. Further, the CM should have set up a commission to investigate reasons behind the f ailure of the Sindh Education Reform Programme (SERP) I & II, weigh dif ferent options and provide recommendations for the future course of action vis-à-vis this and other similar programmes. But, on the contrary, the government took exception to the article and sacked me the same day, informing me that the CM had taken serious notice of it. Despite the f act that these of ficers were on good terms with me, knew my reputation and were well-versed with laws, they disregarded normal etiquettes and rules.

I have been writing articles on education for the last several years for different newspapers and continued the same during this job. One may wonder as to why they did not take notice before and why they got so of fended now. The basic reason is that the Sindh government and the World Bank both are very keen to start SERP-III despite continuous failures.

I had not divulged internal secrets of the department, but only that information was used to substantiate my arguments in the article which was already publicly available i.e. PSLM, SEMIS, SAT and SERP project documents. Moreover, I have been keeping an eye on SERP since the day it was launched. My article on June 13 was an extension and repetition of my previous article, `The decline in Sindh` published in Dawn on Dec 20, 2016. If we couldn`t produce the desired results within a decade, why are we keen on starting another programme? Public of fice holders are accountable for all funds at their disposal; hence they are not immune to positive criticism. It is a bizarre approach to snatch the livelihood of those who dare to raise voice and ignore of ficers accountable who waste public money and time and consequently deprive millions of children of their right to education! Lastly,itis theeducation department where critical, independent and bold voices must be encouraged rather than be gagged.

I committed a sin to mirror reality.

Asghar Soomro Karachi