All over a letter

11
155

What a tamasha

From Jinnah the incorruptible to Zardari who defies description, from Cornelius to Iftikhar Chaudhry, from Liaquat to Raja Rental, Prince of Darkness, what a journey we have had. What a fall my dear countrymen, what a fall. If you have tears, prepare to shed them now. God has shown us the mirror. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Raja Rental is our latest punishment. We need a ‘Taubah Commission’.

Let not I, but a former Indian Supreme Court judge say it: “I regret to say that the Pakistani SC, particularly its chief justice, has been showing utter lack of restraint…It has clearly gone overboard and flouted all canons of jurisprudence.” Don’t trash it just because he is Indian.

It’s all very well to uphold a principle and protect an institution, but sometimes you have to protect an institution from its protectors if they fail to show moderation and balance.

Is it punch and counterpunch? In one fell swoop the odious Sehbai’s YouTube interview put the CJ, the media and the army chief on the spot. Now in one fell swoop, the SC has put the parliament-legislature and the executive on the spot and brought the system to flashpoint. If the native Sindhi is feeling raw, I can’t blame him. Does his party have no place in Pakistan’s echelons of power despite winning elections? What if Zardari changes his mind and declares, “Pakistan na khappay – Pakistan doesn’t work?” What will they do then?

I only ask. I want to be educated.

1. Can a country progress without an independent but balanced judiciary?

2. Are judges the judiciary? Or are they its employees, paid by the people through their government, just as the foreign secretary is not the foreign ministry, nor the foreign minister the foreign policy? All are employees of the government, all paid by your money and mine, aren’t they?

3. Can’t judges and their judgements be criticised and questioned rationally and respectfully?

4. Can’t we also wonder about judges and their actions and ask questions on the basis that when there is smoke there must be fire? Isn’t that our democratic, Islamic and civilised right?

5. Shouldn’t justice not only be done but also be seen to be done? Therefore, should not judges, above all, and that too of the highest court, not only be honest, impartial and aloof but also be seen to be so?

6. Are judges above the law?

7. Is it not axiomatic that every institution and branch of government, including and especially the judiciary, must remain in its domain and not transgress onto the domains of others?

8. Isn’t the National Assembly the people? Doesn’t God say that the people are His vicegerents? Hasn’t He devolved some of his Sovereignty on them, which is why the parliament-legislature is supreme amongst all three branches of government?

9. Thus, doesn’t the Speaker more than any other represent the people? She judged that the conviction of the PM for contemning the court did not merit disqualification. The SC overruled her. Can it? Can it overrule the judgment of the elected head of the supreme branch of government and thereby overrule the people, the vicegerents of God Almighty? Common sense says it can’t.

10. Isn’t it a cornerstone of democracy that only the people can elect and throw out their PM?

11. If the SC can ride roughshod over the executive and the parliament-legislature in one go, shouldn’t we then hand over the whole jing bang tamasha to the judiciary and be done with it?

12. If the SC cannot overrule the Speaker and sack the PM, can the Speaker charge the SC with contempt of parliament and the people?

As I said, I only ask to be educated. I write on the assumption that the reader is familiar with the history and contours of the case under which the appointed SC judges threw the elected PM out of office retroactively from April 26, 2012, when it first convicted him of contempt of court. All over a stupid letter that the government didn’t write. We the trampled spectators are now seeing the system in jeopardy.

The hope that we would have a prime minister who completes his term was forlorn. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani didn’t write the letter because the president has immunity under the constitution and he would be violating his oath to preserve and protect it by ignoring the immunity clause. There is much merit in this reasoning. He chose to remain loyal to the constitution and lose office. Suddenly, we had no prime minister, no government and no budget. All decisions taken by the executive since April 26 became illegal, even the appointment of judges. I assume they didn’t attend court till the new government was installed and the mess cleared. Else, can the Speaker not haul those judges up for contempt too?

It’s too late to bleat that the allegedly corrupt Gilani was protecting a corrupt president. You should have thought about it when you elected them. It’s too late to bleat that the SC is throwing the system into jeopardy. They’re back thanks to you.

Speculation is rife. Did the SC proceed on the assumption that Zardari would dig in his heels, a standoff would ensue, the court would ask the army to come to its aid and get its order enforced, the army would send the entire lot packing, appoint a caretaker-undertaker government with perchance some judge to head it which would ask the SC for more time than the mandated three months to clean the mess before holding elections? Was it a trap set for Zardari? One only asks because many people are asking. I don’t think the army chief is so naive. But whether he likes it or not, the emerging situation could likely make it impossible for the army not to intervene. I’ve always said that it is the civilian branches of government going loco over power and money tussles that throw the country into the lap of the army. If the system works well, the army wouldn’t dare intervene.

If the trap theory is correct, Zardari didn’t fall into it. He decided to respect the SC’s judgment with reservations and nominate another to be elected prime minister. It was a brilliant move. He took the wind out of the trapper’s sails. Now what? The rigmarole starts all over again? Will the SC ask the new sacrificial lamb – sorry, PM – to write the wretched letter to the Swiss, he refuses, it throws him out too, Zardari gets another elected and so the musical chairs continue till elections? If the PPP wins the most seats and heads the new coalition government again, its PM will also refuse to write the letter. Zardari gets elected to another term and the music goes on for another five years. Impossible. Something will have to give.

Much before that the SC could ask the army for help. Or, indeed, the army might intervene even before the SC asks it to. Of course, there’s always the possibility that they would write the letter, but I wouldn’t bet on it. The PPP is great at playing victim, not without just cause. Having achieved victimhood again, they might just decide to call elections and catch their opponents with their pants down. What a horrible sight to put before the king.

11 COMMENTS

  1. Before you elected them? You are obviously not in the least privy to the voting practices employed by the big three parties by paying off their most destitute and illiterate constituents to drive them in droves to voting stations and vote for exactly the person they are paid to vote for. This is the worst kept secret in the country, and considering that only a paltry fraction of the population is educated, that leaves a staggering majority that is ripe for the picking for these vultures.

    • Agreed!, democracy only counts people it cannot judge people therefore Pakistan had become the worst place for democracy to be practiced, thus we should go for dictatorship since the illiterate majority must not have the right of voting

  2. Superb article. Hope saner voices wil prevail and people will understand the trap set for the murder of democracy

  3. Yes, a country cannot progress without an independent and balanced judiciary. But a country will land into chaos and anarchy if its judiciary oversteps its legal and constitutional limits and begines to dictate parliament which is expressive of sovereign will of the people. This article is deficient in analysis. Judiciary must be balanced first of all, and that s what that Tarazoo hung on Supreme Court building means, but is this judiciary balanced and neutral? No.

  4. But a country will land into chaos and anarchy if its judicary is not seen to be balanced and neutral and oversteps its limits.

  5. Author totally disregards the facts and creates a case against the judiciary which is to say the least full of holes. It is really sad. If asking the executive to write a letter which simply asks that the steps taken by them in pursuance of the NRO, is so stupid then why did they not got approval for NRO from the parliament? Why they did not defend it in the court. When every ones NRO cases have been opened then why should Zardari and his lawyer be given thie special treatment? If this is the intellectual depth and level of analysis, is it a wonder that Raja Rental is the prime minister.

  6. It is a national disgrace when esteemed writers like above come flaking on the only functioning state institution of the country. If Parliament is to be an unbridled horse and Parliamentarians to be brought to book only by election then why have courts anyway? Why so much waste of national exchequer? All we have to do is hold elections and whoever wins will automatically be declared innocent and free of all guilt. As for Indian Judge, I doubt he ever witnessed the case where Executive so flagrantly disregard the judgements of Judicial branch. It has certainly no parallel in India so his limited exposure is the source of his opinion.

  7. Seems the author has forgetten about wrongs done by PPP vis a vis SC judgements not implemented by them.
    Need an objective assessment from people of your stature or are we expecting more?

  8. excellent article! And yes, we should all be asking the questions Humayun has put forward. It is only Allah Himself who cannot be questioned, but mere mortals, no matter what 'exalted' status they occupy in this life must be questioned for what they do. There can be no total submission except to Allah the Almighty! To try and 'usurp' that function is kufr.

  9. Mr.Humayun – thanks for a very sane and balanced article – you have spoken people voice "SC and its Judges are not above the Law" – no immunity for them if they cross their limits punish them like common PM.

  10. Yes Judges are not an institution bur employees of it, and they should also be punished if they do corruption or try to defend corrupt.
    And on other side if a PM is elected by people that does not make him authority to do corruption and appoint all the corrupt on important ministries/ offices.
    What are you talking about that people have right to elect or throw out a PM, does it seem like this ??? Was Raja elected as PM by people who are suffering from load shedding, were senators elected by people or by Money in recent senate elections???
    So before teaching a lesson for judges and quoting statements of an Indian judge , please make parliament free of corruption, horse trading and hypocrites. Then people will stand by their parliament instead of judges.
    An institution is made respectable by the people who are part of it, If parliamentarians themselves don't respect it, how can you expect they can earn respect for it.

Comments are closed.