One of the lawyers from
government side while commenting on the Supreme Court’s judgment restoring the
Chief Justice of Pakistan and quashing of the presidential reference against
him in a talk-show first said: one side has to lose and the other to win. Then,
in the same breath he said: it’s a win-win situation. He said: it’s a victory
for justice, a victory for the rule of law, and a victory for General Musharraf
also. He explained that it’s during the regime of a dictator that such a
historic ruling was made. Probably, he meant that the judgment might have been
influenced in favor of the government. Regardless of what would have been this
lawyer’s stance had government won the case, it’s worth-pondering where the
government stands now.
The reactions from the
government after the verdict show that its thinking is not much different from
that of the lawyer’s. It says it accepts the judgment and it won’t be going for
a review petition or another reference against the Chief Justice. But it’s
eager to take credit for letting the court hear the case on merit and decide it
independently. Also, it seems it’s not in a mood to admit its mistakes, and
beyond that to mend its ways. A strong reason for this belief is its past
behavior and of previous governments’ also. Just like the general sentiment
before the verdict that the court’s judgment would be providing a saving for
the faces involved, especially for the government; the present public sentiment
expects some “balancing act” from the government to neutralize its defeat in
the apex court. But if so happens it will be most uncalled for and making the
government weaker.
It’s time for the present
regime to take stock of its character and performance. As is clear, it has a
long list of negative points to its credit. It’s unconstitutional, it’s
military-led, it’s immoral, it’s manipulated, it’s dictatorial, it’s imposing,
it’s a travesty of democracy, it’s without a social base, and last but not
least, whether it is at its climax or not, it seems like all other military
governments it will leave the people of Pakistan ever more insecure and
deprived, and their problems enhanced and aggravated incomparably.
Additionally, as such
governments derive their power from a deformed constitution; this one has also
been bent upon seeking more and more power. This lust for power has landed it
in self-created crises, the most recent examples of which are the issues of Lal
Masjid and Chief Justice’s removal. As to the Lal Masjid issue, the delaying of
government action against the Lal Masjid brothers and their accomplices
strengthened the stances of the conspiracy theorists. As one of the important
explanations, it was suggested that government itself or some intelligence
agencies were behind its staging. Another such explanation placed the Lal
Masjid issue against the backdrop of judicial crisis and fight against
terrorism.
Be that as it may, the crisis
of Lal Masjid was, directly or indirectly, one of the biggest lapses of the government
and its agencies. As governments in Pakistan have been fond of patronizing
elements which could be used at various occasions for furthering their cause, Lal
Masjid brothers were no different. With time, when they thought they were
powerful enough they started “challenging the state or government’s authority.”
Regardless of the controversy that the whole episode of Lal Masjid was a
concocted drama, what was happening in and around the Lal Masjid made
government’s authority suffer a dangerous setback.
It is appreciable in clear
terms that in executing the ‘operation silence’ the government acted very
cautiously, showed restraint and cared for the lives of a large number of
innocent girls and boys. It’s a victory for the rule of law. Had it bowed down
to the demands of the Lal Masjid occupiers whether due to outside political
pressure or for its own expediencies and let the occupiers escape from the law,
the conspiracy theorists would have been proved right.
However, the restraint and
care for human life do not absolve the government from its negligence or
complicity. Why and how did it let this happen in the heart of the capital? How
come the Lal Masjid brothers got such fire power store and such militants hide
in the Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa? Why the Lal Masjid brothers were set free on
the instance of a minister while they were caught in possession of unlawful
arms? Hadn’t one minister who is now a member of the federal cabinet passed a
number of years in jail for the same offence? Why under the nose of government
and its agencies the Lal MasJid brothers were given unbounded freedom to play
with the freedom of local and foreign citizens? Why in the presence of many
cases registered against them the Lal Masjid brothers were never taken to task?
Same is the case with the
Chief Justice’s removal from his office. From the very start, the government
behaved quite irresponsibly. It didn’t care a dime for the constitutional
provisions on the issue. The more one looks into the events unfolded during
March 9 to March 13, the more one is convinced of the fact that it was simply a
case of outright removal of the head of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Isn’t it
enough to show where stood the highest court in the eyes of the present
government? It was very likely that the government had succeeded in getting the
Chief Justice resigned quietly. But for Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad
Chaudhry’s courage, unprecedented in the history of Pakistan, and for the
lawyers’ rallying together on Mr. Chaudhry’s side that the government miserably
failed in bringing the court under its sway.
No doubt, both the crises
were a creation of government’s own inaction and action. Now, it will have to
cope with the unintended consequences unraveling in the form of suicide
bombings, terrorist attacks on the security forces, and far weakened and
demoralized government machinery. For this it is necessary for the government
to accept the Supreme Court’s judgment whole-heartedly in letter and spirit,
and not to jeopardize its independent working in any manner. In the context of
euphoria and hopes of realizing a dreamland generated by the restoration of
Chief Justice and rising level of expectations of the various strata of
Pakistani society from the Judiciary, it is of utmost importance that
government must follow the sentiments of the people.
It is high time for the
government to realize that taking advantage of this moment the crucial issues
such as political instability, terrorism, ethnic and religious strife marring
the integrity of Pakistani society may be resolved amicably. It should see
through this moment optimistically to a new Pakistan emerging out of the future
horizon. It should not fabricate hurdles and put them in the way of this
movement to let there be a smooth transition. Surely, it will beget more
violence. Rather, it should let the judiciary hold free and fair elections to
have the people of Pakistan a government of their choice. Like the Supreme
Court’s judgment that has opened new venues for the aggrieved and deprived
sections of society, smaller provinces and political parties, and as they are
most likely to make use of this as a door where they could knock at for
justice, free and fair elections will prove to be an impetus to this process of
resolution. They will ensure that instead of a government that comes to power
as a result of some deal with the military regime, their true representatives
are there to solve their problems.
Lastly, another significant
issue needs to be addressed here. It is most unfortunate that the US and Western
powers and their statesmen dogmatically believe that it is only a military
government be that of Musharraf or any other General that could contain
terrorists and fight terrorism. Or, as they fear lest the terrorists take hold
of Pakistan’s nuclear installations. This is quite a mistaken view and
outrageous to the people of Pakistan. Constitutionally, Pakistan Army is an
institution that is supposed to work under the civilian set-up. Why doesn’t it
fight terrorism and terrorists under the aegis of a civilian government? Mind
it this civilian government need not be one that is of US or West’s choice.
This must be one that wins the elections fairly and freely, and cares for the
aspirations of the people of Pakistan. That’s the way to the long-term
resolution of the problem of terrorism also, and that is what the present
Pakistani government must heed to make the Supreme Court’s judgment a win-win
situation.
[This article was completed
on July 22, 2007. A shortened version of it appeared in the Mint (India) on August 6, 2007.]
No comments:
Post a Comment