Pakistani politics

Fontgate: Could a Microsoft typeface bring down Nawaz Sharif in Pakistan?

The prime minister’s daughter Maryam Nawaz is accused of falsifying documents, submitted for the Panama Papers enquiry, using the Calibri font.

A political scandal that has gripped Pakistan for over a year and threatens to bring down Nawaz Sharif’s government has come to be pivoted on an unassuming typeface.

Calibri, Microsoft’s default font for its WordPad and PowerPoint programmes, became a buzzword in the country this week after a Joint Investigation Team found that the prime minister’s daughter Maryam Nawaz had falsified documents. Apparently, the documents submitted to the team dated to 2006, but were written in Calibri, a font that was not commercially available before January 31, 2007.

The report marks the latest twist in the long-running saga of corruption involving the Sharifs. Questions first arose over the financial affairs of the family after the Panama Papers, leaked in 2016, revealed that three of the prime minister’s children owned, through an offshore company, properties in London that were not declared in their assets. Opposition groups led by Imran Khan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf have accused the Sharifs of failing to explain where they got the money to buy the assets from.

In April, Nawaz Sharif narrowly survived an inconclusive ruling in the case by the Supreme Court, which found there was not enough evidence of corruption to remove him from office. Instead it ordered further investigation to determine the money trail. The resulting probe now threatens to unseat him, and Calibri sits at the heart of it.

Fontgate, as it has come to be dubbed, quickly trended on Twitter, with users eager to revel in the misfortunes of a political dynasty that is looked upon unsympathetically even at the best of times.

Some saw it as Pakistan’s ‘covfefe’ moment:

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Frederik Obermaier declared Fontgate the favourite part of the investigation team’s report.

Naturally, plenty of memes were involved.

Puns, too.

Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, made an appearance as well.

Away from the jokes, debate raged about whether the Joint Investigation Team’s claims were correct. Many of the prime minister’s supporters pointed out that the font had been around from earlier than suggested. According to Microsoft’s website, an initial version of the font was available for download in 2005 and beta versions are likely to have been around even earlier. The contention over Calibri’s exact origins spiraled so out of control that on Wednesday, Wikipedia temporarily suspended public editing to its Calibri article until July 18 because of a slew of edit requests. The previous day, there had been over 30 revisions to the article.

Even Nawaz Sharif’s lawyer Zafarullah Khan was compelled to address the controversy in a press conference. “Please Google and see that [the font] was released in August 2004,” he said. Pakistan’s leading English newspaper Dawn took him up on the challenge and went further by contacting Lucas de Groot, the designer recognised as the font’s creator. A representative of his company, LucasFonts, admitted that Calibri had been designed in 2004 but said, “Early Windows betas are intended for programmers and technology freaks to see what works and what doesn’t. As the file size of such operating systems is huge, it would have been a serious effort to get.”

De Groot himself wrote separately to the newspaper, questioning “why would anyone use a completely unknown font for an official document in 2006?”

The implausibility of his working theory was the least of Khan’s worries, however. In an audacious attempt to defend his client, the lawyer drew parallels between Sharif and Jesus Chris, earning the ire of the civil society group Christian Action Committee, which demanded that criminal proceedings be launched against him for blasphemy unless he apologises.

As for the prime minister, he may need much more than just apologies for his exoneration.

Usman Ahmad is a British writer and photographer currently based in Pakistan.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.