In this view, Pakistanis, like Indians, have long given up expectations of probity in public life and know their politicians will be venal to the bitter end. And, therefore, the political battle Bhutto intends to wage will be more decisive than her legal one. In the Pakistani context there are particular factors which encourage cynicism. One is the Sharif-Bhutto vendetta which each side has pursued by corrupting other institutions of government. Each side has taken turns to destroy the other through the courts. The cases Bhutto initiated when she was in power against several members of Sharif's family and business associates have not been brought to a final conclusion. Sharif, more systematically, passed special laws and set up an ehtesab bureau to investigate Bhutto and has been able to get a verdict in two years. Both have contributed to the malaise in the system. Democratic institutions andpractices, under constant assault by the very politicians who are required to build them, have still to strike deep roots and earn widespread respect. Bhutto, for example, publicly accuses sitting judges of political and personal bias. As extraordinary as this is it is of a piece with what Sharif has done to reduce the independence and credibility of the judiciary.

It will not be surprising if ordinary people see the Rawalpindi verdict as a partisan process and a continuation of politics by other means. This will be a shame because it will be the loss of a major opportunity to drive home the lesson that politicians, no matter how powerful or popular, can and must be called to account under the law. Idealists can only hope that the political battles ahead over corruption and monumental greed will lead to demands for reform of the whole political establishment. For that to come about will require popular initiative. As economic hardship bites deeper, it is just possible more people will demand a full andhonest account of public spending and the cleansing of public life.