One cannot but wonder on the Chief Justice’s remarks on June 18 while hearing the petition against National Assembly’s Speaker’s ruling whereby she had refused to forward the Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s disqualification reference to the Election Commission. While Attorney General and Gilani’s defence counsel were arguing against the petition on June 18, the CJ remarked that how come a convicted person could represent 180 million people. It’s worth noting that the Attorney General and defence counsel didn’t complete their arguments till late morning on June 19 while the Supreme Court ordered on June 18 for enhanced security arrangements in the court room for the next day.
In other societies, courts are expected not to become a party but to act as a neutral body between prosecution and defence to decide the case on arguments’ merit. But in our case, the Supreme Court chose to become a party as is evident from Chief Justice’s remarks on June 18 and court’s expectation that next day’s planned disqualification of prime minister may result in a law and order situation.
PM’s fate was sealed before the conclusion of his lawyers’ arguments. Apparently, it’s a judicial coup d’état with the support of some hidden forces. I don’t know whether we are learning something from the Egyptian Supreme Court who last week dissolved the parliament on strange pretexts, or it’s vice versa.
MASOOD KHAN
Jubail, Saudi Arabia