Pakistan’s Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, while addressing a ceremony in London on May 27, 2012 said, “The weakest democracy is better than martial law.” This is a public statement of the honourable chief justice, and we may have our views on this. Well, according to our chief justice, the democracy even weak or defective is preferable to any other form of government.
There cannot be any denying of this fact. But the question is, if democracy of any form or type can work without any slightest of semblance of any kind of justice, as is the case in present day Pakistan? Can the honourable chief justice deny the fact that, in Pakistan, in addition to many things failing in judicial system, the approaches and attitudes of judges at every level are not dictatorial?
Can he deny that, the judges here give more emphasis on formats and formalities than on disseminating justice to common man and the justice seekers? Can he deny that, here in Pakistan, people are deprived of any kind of justice; and justice system here is weakest of the weak, not because of lack of administrative and judicial lacunae in justice system, but to a great extent because of attitude of judges, who so far as a common man is concerned is not answerable to any one? In such a situation, the “weakest democracy” may be better than any other thing, but cannot respond to general public’s need for a long time.
In martial law, there may be no law. In martial law, there may not be any constitution. And who else is in need of constitution which is open to at least 18 crore types of interpretations and misinterpretations? Who else needs such a constitution, so least about constitutional rules, when general public cannot get food, clothe, education, justice, and any sort of basic/fundamental rights to live on peacefully? If the country seeks anarchy in the name of “weakest democracy”, then may Allah save us all! Ameen.
SYED SAYEF HUSSAIN
Karachi