Not exactly new either
Intentions are the most misleading and over-rated things imaginable, for human beings are endowed with an amazing capacity to consciously or unconsciously convince themselves of their altruistic motives where none exist. It requires an extraordinarily rare ability for self-criticism to figure this fact out, as applied to oneself even if not to others.
Intentions become especially dangerous in situations involving exhorting others to piety. For even when one’s intentions seem perfectly legit (which is almost always the case), is it not infrequent that one can be justifiably accused of trying to win Paradise on other people’s expense?
Justice Ibrahim Zia, the new CJ of the AJK Supreme Court, announced that the annual increment for court employees will be conditional on the regular offering of prayers. He added that the offering of prayers will be mandatory for all employees, and it will be secretly monitored.
A few pertinent questions first: What about non-Muslim employees of the court, if any? Will they be required to perform their prayers, and will they get the annual increment regardless? Also, while today it may just be the praying, who is to say that tomorrow it won’t be a matter of praying in a particular way? Won’t it be advisable to leave at least some things uncontaminated with monetary considerations? Also, who will be the noble souls doing the ‘secret’ monitoring? Will the resulting informer-type culture be appropriate for a court of law (of all places)? Would such prayers be meaningful anyway? I daresay many staffers might volunteer to spy on their colleagues, but won’t their time and efforts be more fruitfully employed elsewhere – helping poor petitioners getting some justice, for example?
To put it in perspective, it can be safely claimed that no Pakistani was ever faced with lack of facilities when it comes to saying his prayers. Allah has done all the facilitating – there are enough mosques, muezzins, and prayer breaks for that purpose – and more. Sadly, the same cannot be said about justice, because there are nearly not enough courts and judges, and the whole judicial system is too expensive for all but a tiny minority. This is a country where it takes years for a case to be decided, only for it to go for appeal in a higher court where the cycle continues; where getting an adjournment for the flimsiest of excuses is a piece of cake; where cases are pursued by generations on end; where it is joked that it’s much better to hire a judge than a lawyer. Who amongst us hasn’t known, even if not directly experienced, the above! To be sure, none of this is the Honourable CJ’s fault, or exclusively that of the AJK courts for that matter. It’s a country-wide mess that the whole judiciary, including the AJK branch, has to somehow correct.
Of course, this is hardly the first time in the history of this unfortunate nation that religious matters are being mixed with the day-to-day business of the state. We’ve been here before (in fact it seems that every few years or so the ghost of Zia-ul-Haq comes back to haunt us.) How many cycles of nazimin-e-salat, the ehtaram-e-ramzan ordinance, and the like do we need before realising that same-old ideas will yield same-old results? That while it’s a great idea to die for the citizens’ right to pray as and when they want to, nobody, including the boss, can be allowed to enforce his religious convictions on people belonging to any public institution, whether it’s a school, university, office, or a court of law? That it is not merely the more practical way but the only way?
Let me conclude with a humble submission to his lordship the CJ to reconsider his priorities, and concentrate on what he has been originally entrusted to do. Making this earthly existence somewhat bearable for his petitioners by striving to provide quick and inexpensive justice is a worthy – and difficult enough – endeavour. Incentives on religious considerations will only dilute this mission. While there may sometimes be a case for trying out novel ideas that could eventually turn out to be good or bad, there can hardly ever be an excuse for ‘testing’ the already tried-tested-and-failed ones.
