To do as the court says

Should the prime minister fail to write the letter, the PPP will have no one but itself to blame for the consequences.


Editorial February 12, 2012

There are many possible reasons why Prime Minster Yousaf Raza Gilani has defied the Supreme Court’s orders and refused to write a letter to the Swiss authorities asking them to reopen their case against President Asif Zardari. He may be trying to play out the clock to a time when it may not matter whether the letter is written or not, i.e. right before a general election. Or, he may even genuinely believe that the president’s immunity under Article 248 of the Constitution gives him the authority to ignore the Supreme Court’s directive. Whatever the reason may be, after yesterday’s hearing, where the Supreme Court dismissed the prime minister’s appeal against a possible indictment on contempt charges, Gilani now has no option. It is time for him to write the letter so that there is no reason left for the apex court to indict him on the said charge. The PPP and its defenders have argued that the Supreme Court is against its government. These suspicions, which in any case are impossible to prove, should not mean icence to ignore the court’s orders. The prime minister has flirted with contempt of court before by refusing to follow the Supreme Court’s orders on appointments before giving in at the last minute. He now has till February 13 to do the same in the Swiss corruption cases. Should he fail to write the letter, the PPP will have no one but itself to blame for the consequences. And those consequences could extend to the removal of the prime minister from office.

The PPP may well be justly aggrieved that it is surrounded by hostile institutions from all sides. But the prime minister’s actions reek of protecting the president over our system of democracy. Even if the president’s immunity is upheld, it will no longer be applicable once he is out of office and in that eventuality there may be no legal or constitutional hitch in preventing the Supreme Court from going ahead on this issue. That is why it is better right now for the prime minister to do as the court says.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 13th, 2012.

COMMENTS (5)

Khurram Khalid | 12 years ago | Reply Has it ever happened that a country's highest court insisted that criminal cases be initiated/re-initiated against its sitting president in a foreign country? Not only that, a sitting prime minister is indicted by the same court for not doing it. Just imagine French court convicting its PM for not initiating a criminal case against Sarkozy in the district court of Jalandhar, India. Pakistan's reputation is anyways internationally low, they further want to lower it by having foreign courts hearing cases against our sitting president reported in all the international media or the news of indictment of a PM for not letting it happen. Why supporting it? Has Zarddari's persona become bigger than the president of Pakistan's? Does their hatred towards him know no limits that they are ready to tarnish our international image even further? What will be the impact of this obsessive insistence on humiliating Zardari and putting on defensive the govt. on our day to day to governance issues? It is disheartening to see that even the non jihadi media, legal fraternity and politicians saying let it be if the court wants it. Just look at the amount of contempt towards the choice of people who with a majority elected the president and the prime minster; and at the absurdity that an un-signed and an un-owned memo has put our national security on risk, but a criminal case initiated in a foreign court against the supreme commander of our armed forces will do the opposite! Contempt or no contempt of court, we must raise our voice against this madness prevailing in our courts. Article 248 or no 248, they must forget for a while that the president is Zardari whom they hate more than anything on this earth and wait until he is no more president of the country then do whatever they want.
Agnostic Muslim | 12 years ago | Reply

A very balanced editorial sir.

Thank you for an opinion piece that argues the merits of the rule of law and the necessity for people and institutions to implement the verdicts of the courts, without which the justice system is useless.

Whether or not the courts should have taken action against past military dictators does not change the fact that the current government is undermining the justice system by refusing to implement court orders.

People forget that it was under similar circumstances that this particular Chief Justice and numerous other judges were dismissed by a military dictator, for finally refusing to endorse certain actions and policies that were considered to be detrimental to public interest.

We are not a perfect world, nation or society, and we should not expect perfection from individuals - judge the actions of the current Supreme Court on their individual merits, and do not drag in injustices from history to excuse the crimes of the current government.

As the saying goes, 'daer aaye durust aaye'...

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ