The judiciary needs to be wary and walk clear of the pitfalls
The prime minister has been given another twenty-two days for ‘thinking’ – a process that has already been going on for over one year since the NRO implementation judgement was first announced by the apex judiciary. This reflects an absolute bankruptcy of morality on the part of those who sought the additional time and an inability to comprehend the morbid game plan of the PPP leadership by the members of the bench. This game plan is being fully aided and abetted by the ruling party’s partners in the government.
There is another issue that is being increasingly debated particularly by people who played a pioneering role in leading the charge for the restoration of an independent judiciary. It is a two-aspect issue: one aspect relates to an apparent lack of equitability in dealing with cases before the apex court and the other relates to an inordinate delay in announcing judgements and enforcing implementation. While the government understandably enjoys no credibility and does not appear to be interested in fighting its battles on this pitch, these visible failings are gradually eroding the standing and stature of the judiciary which is a cause of concern for every citizen who is interested in the ascendency of the rule of law in the country. The question that rattles the brain is why is the judiciary allowing this to happen and, if and when it actually happens as it might if the present approach continues, does it fully comprehend its impact both in terms of the damage it would accrue to the institution and, by extension, to the country?
There are other issues that defy reason. While people have been charged with contempt of court for lesser transgressions, those guilty of graver calumnies are being spared. Worse still, the cases against some of these contemnors have been pending since antiquity without an end in sight. This generates an extremely unsettling impression regarding a lack of effectiveness of the judiciary and, by consequence, impacts its moral stature which is its principal ingredient of strength. Faisal Raza Abidi and Sharjil Memon are roaming free in spite of having hurled venomous invectives at the judiciary, the Chief Justice and the honorable judges while some old cases of contempt have been allowed to drag on indefinitely.
The Asghar Khan case has become an enigma of sorts. It has now been pending for almost two decades and the apex court, after finally taking notice of it, appears to be in no haste to dispose it off. This is one case where a judgement would unfurl the inherent corruption that plagues our system which does not allow it to function to the betterment of the people. As rumour has it, the judiciary may be constrained to give judgement against a leader who is perceived to be a principal supporter and whose party played a proactive role in its restoration. But it should not be forgotten that it was Shahbaz Sharif (understandably with the consent of the elder brother) who, in a meeting with the Principal Officer at the US Consulate in Lahore on March 14, 2009, was reportedly willing to “end the issue and remove the Chief Justice once and for all” after his symbolic restoration. He was also willing, in fact eager, to cooperate in curtailing the powers of a “problematic jurist”.
The judiciary should also not forget that it was the government of the same political party that resorted to physically attacking the apex court when confronted with a move for its ouster. The duplicitous move by the Sharif Brothers to support the judiciary was nothing more than a cover-up for their deep-set dislike of a system that would empower the independence of all the pillars of the state. Their mindset would not permit a judiciary that would be committed to upholding the supremacy of the rule of law and that would function as a check on the corruption and ineptness of political governments. Once given a chance in the saddle, they would prove to be more dictatorial than any of their predecessors and would quickly outshine their past proclivities to enforce the concept of ‘democratic’ dictatorship.
But, more important than anything else is the question of the merit of the case in the context of the ascendency of the rule of law for one and all – for those who may have supported a cause as well as those who may not have done so. More so, there is no middle course in law as some may be trying to bargain for by securing further time. Law is black and white with no grey areas. It is meant to deal with all with the same yardstick. Why is it then that a judgement in the Asghar Khan case is being delayed inordinately? Why is it then that the judgements in the cases of those who have proven to have committed contempt are not being announced while some contemnors are not being summoned at all? Why is it then that there appear to be different barometers for judging different cases and different people involved? This perception, if allowed to simmer, can become a powerful viewpoint that would gravely impact the judiciary’s credibility and that of its honorable judges.
More ‘thinking’ is not going to resolve the problem. It’ll only tarnish the apex court’s image and its moral stature. This ‘thinking’ will be devoted to finding yet another excuse to buy more time and then some more. There is no end to the political leaderships’ deviousness in planning tricks to elongate their corrupt rule to the detriment of various institutions’ independence and their operational freedom. This ‘thinking’ will also be devoted to finding ways to spin more webs and create more misgivings about the judicial activism and painting it as the principal cause of the failure of the government. The judiciary and its honorable judgers should be wary of this trick and pre-empt it by eliminating delays both in handing out judgements as well as their implementation. In addition to looking inwards for remedying any lack of equitability, it must take urgent steps to escape the trap that has been laid to strangulate the one institution which has nurtured the hopes of the people.
The writer is a political analyst. He can be reached at [email protected]
