One we cannot afford
No, it isn’t rock bottom just about yet. The prime minister is yet to have charges of contempt formally framed against him. After that happens, him and his counsel will have some time (how much, depends on the mood of the court) to prepare a defense. If Aitzaz Ahsan, the best lawyer around, couldn’t convince the court otherwise earlier, one would be tempted to predict a guilty verdict by that time. In the case of a conviction, the premier can still appeal against the verdict. In the absolutely worst case scenario of a sentencing, a debate will start on the retention of the office of the prime minister.
In other words, if the government decides to drag its feet – as it is wont to when it comes to matters of the court – even an unpleasantly disposed judiciary won’t be able to put the issue to bed as early as it might want to. In the case of an absolute worst case scenario (conviction; debate on the office of the premier) there is going to be a full-blown constitutional crisis, with even international observers chiming in on the political rights of prisoners of conscience (yes, expect to see the term being used in the coming times whether you like it or not.)
But what all this does to the republic as a whole should not be left unmentioned. In addition to all the high drama that a constitutional crisis accompanies, the havoc that a crisis of the sort is going to wreak havoc on the economy, which, even in the best of political climates, has seen better days. Then there is the issue of foreign policy, with some crucial talks and developments in the near future. And another question, the one often ignored in political discussions, is whether the aforementioned worst case scenario will be the one that finally revs up the activist machinery of the nation’s largest political party. This largely dormant demographic isn’t known for pulling its punches when they’re finally up and about; would this means far greater tumult than, say, the long march of 2008?
But the judiciary isn’t the only body that should be mindful of such eventualities. They will, after all, give judgments based on their interpretation of the law. It is the political government on whom the burden of exercising prudence falls. Perhaps easing up the intransigence on the issue of the letter would be in order.
