Canons breached

Let’s save the slogans for political rallies

It seems there is no end to politics, intolerance and exaggerated reaction in Pakistan. Patience is in short supply and display of disgraceful behaviour in abundance. Thursday was no exception with unwarranted and senseless political sloganeering doing the rounds.

It was not at an election rally or a public protest outside the parliament but the venue of divisive political sloganeering was the Supreme Court of Pakistan. And ironically this time not by politicians or the public but by professional lawyers who created a rumpus outside the apex court building.

The disruptive behaviour exhibited by jiyalas in ‘black coats’ just outside the Supreme Court’s main foyer on Thursday was downright undignified and most unprofessional. They blatantly and disgracefully violated the ‘Canons of Professional Conduct and Etiquette of Advocates’ prescribed in the Pakistan Legal Practitioners & Bar Council Rules, 1976. The Canons begin with the stipulation that “it is the duty of every Advocate to uphold at all times the dignity and high standing of his profession, as well as his own dignity and high standing as a member thereof.” Advocates are advised, by another canon of professional conduct, that “clients, not Advocates, are the litigants. Whatever may be the ill-feeling existing between clients, it should not be allowed to influence Advocates in their conduct and demeanour towards each other or towards the parties in the case.” Unfortunately, these were not the only canons of professional conduct brazenly flouted by a few dozen advocates assembled at the entrance to the Supreme Court on Thursday.

It is a pity that in Pakistan no opportunity is spared to politicise matters even if of purely a legal nature, and self-restraint is seldom exercised. The rowdy scene was witnessed on the premises of the Supreme Court when highly charged members of the legal community, many of whom were part of the lawyers’ movement for restoration of judiciary and advocate rule of law, behaved like an angry mob expressing its opinion on a matter that is to be decided by the Court.

Two groups of lawyers in their uniforms emerged on the scene as Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani appeared before the Supreme Court for contempt of court notice in the NRO implementation case. While one group raised pro-judiciary and anti-government slogans, the other chanted slogans in favour of the government, as if some cricket match was going on. While these lawyers polluted the atmosphere with full-throated sloganeering, no attempt was made by the court administration or management to stop this madness. Those who claimed to be there in support of “azaad adlia” screamed to high heavens with slogans: “chief teray jan nisar bay shumaar, bay shumaar” as if the Chief Justice was a party to the proceedings.

After the proceedings, the prime minister’s lead counsel Aitzaz Ahsan was unable to complete his press conference due to the screaming match. He was threatened by some protesting anti-government lawyers who shouted: “Hakumat kaa jo yar hai ghadaar hai, ghadaar hai.”

One wondered what was all the fuss about when the proceeding went on smoothly and PM managed through his counsel to get the time and space he wanted. When the hearing ended on an apparently amicable note and tension between the judiciary and the executive stood diffused to some extent. This was expected given that the PPP’s seasoned and saner legal mind Aitzaz Ahsan was finally allowed to prevail by the government and chosen as lead counsel for the PM. Also wisely, the party’s belligerent vice president Babar Awan, whose licence to practice law has been suspended pending contempt of court proceedings against him, was kept away from the court.

Debate and discussion in the coming days will revolve around Article 248 of the Constitution pertaining to immunity of President and Prime minister in civil and criminal cases. With Aitzaz sounding confident that he can satisfy the court on this score, the hype about this legal battle appears to have subsided for now.

The lawyers who raised slogans in favour of judiciary on Thursday actually did a disservice to it by unnecessarily dragging it into politics and by making it seem like a party instead of being impartial – a self-defeating exercise that conveys lack of maturity and flagrant disregard for rule of law.

It was no occasion and no forum for such distorted expression of freedom of speech. It negated the spirit of democracy and all norms of decency. Activism of any kind must know its limits and be exercised with a level of responsibility.

Trampling of the sanctity of the court by anyone, least of all by the practitioners of law, must not be allowed to go unnoticed by those who regulate the license to practice and conduct of advocates. An example must be set so such uncivilised behaviour is not repeated.

The writer is a senior journalist and has been a diplomatic correspondent for leading dailies. She was an Alfred Friendly Press Fellow at The Chicago Tribune in the US and a Press Fellow at Wolfson College, Cambridge, UK. She can be reached via email at [email protected]