February 13 – a tragic day for the nation

It’s over, seemingly. The seven-judge decision to charge Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani attains finality with the eight-judge bench rejecting his appeal – February 13 is certainly not a historic day, it is rather the most shameful occurrence that the chief executive of the country will stand in the dock for willfully disobeying the court of law.
It’s not that the court, as the Pakistan People’s Party and its sympathizers take it, has malevolently chosen to disgrace a democratically-elected and the longest-serving prime minister. It’s the prime minister himself who chose to be humbled and disgraced for unqualified loyalty to his party by brazenly disrespecting the rule of law.
Prima facie, it was a case fit for charging the prime minister for contempt of court. It was certainly not a cherry-picking sport for Barrister Aitzaz Ahsen – the protagonist of lawyers’ movement who struggled for the rule of law. The celebrated top jurist did assiduously try to save his client, but in vain. His arguments revolved around the charge of contempt but the court remained focused on the cause of not writing the letter to the countries where the cases of alleged corruption had been withdrawn.
The prime minister took a position that he was advised not to write “the letter” because the constitution provided immunity to the president under Article 248. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsen, however, did not touch the question of immunity for reasons best known to him despite the court asking him to seek immunity for the president in support of the ground the prime minister had determined was a sufficient reason for him not to write the letter.
It was, without any iota of doubt, clear to even a not-law-knowing person with a common sense that even by engaging Aitzaz Ahsen this case would not go the way the government had expected – the court would take a lenient view of the prime minister’s disrespect to its decision. Rather, the court furiously objected to a reference in the appeal that it would be ironic to proceed against a man who had ordered the release of the detained judges even before taking oath as prime minister. It does not happen that way.
The intention of the government that it would not write the letter was unambiguously known. President Asif Ali Zardari is on the record to have said that the letter would not be written, come what may. So a faithful-to-the-party Yousaf Raza Gilani had no other option but to defy the court and he dared it.
The PPP considers that the court is vindictive towards the government. That is the assessment of a party whose government has throughout been on a confrontational path – there are numerous examples of the government doing things its own way and the court taking cognizance of every such action that was either against the rules or politically-motivated.
The only option now for the prime minister is to tender unconditional apology for disobeying the court and save him from conviction on the charge of contempt of court and avoid disqualification from holding public office. But even if he apologises, the letter has to be written – come what may, the court order is also clear. And the consequences of not writing the letter may bring political instability in the country.
The possible Plan-B of the PPP could be to sacrifice Yousaf Raza Gilani at the altar of loyalty and move for appoint of a new prime minister. This process will surely take its time for hobnobbing within the parliament to solicit support from other political parties as the PPP does not have simple majority to form its government independently. And the possibility is that the election of the prime minister does not take place and the letter remains unwritten – this will serve the PPP’s purpose, drag the issue.