Judges not 'sadiq and ameen' either: Vawda

Former federal minister Faisal Vawda on Monday cast aspersions on the country’s judiciary over its dogmatic adherence to the constitution, bemoaning that the interests of defence and security have often been sacrificed on the altar of legalism.

Referring to an observation made by one of the judges, Vawda went on to question which among the judges measured up to the standards of being "sadiq and ameen" (honest and righteous) as prescribed by law.

"If we [politicians] are not ‘sadiq and ameen’, then who among the judges is?” he asked in an appearance on a private news channel.

In a no-holds-barred interview, Vawda trained guns on the judiciary, condemning its "whimsical verdicts" that disrupted political trajectories, led to unfair executions, and inflicted widespread damage on the nation.

Drawing a comparison to India's judicial system, the former minister referred to the Indian Supreme Court's decision to uphold the removal of the special status of Kashmir, saying the Indian court prioritised the security and defence of the country over constitutional norms and laws.

"The decision reflects the precedence given to their country's security over constitutional and legal considerations," he remarked.

“You can criticise other rulings of their judicial system, it is clear their courts prioritise national defence and relegate the constitution and law to a secondary position in matters related to national security.”

The former minister expressed regret over what he perceived as a different approach in Pakistan's judicial system, where national defence appeared to be overshadowed by constitutional and legal aspects.

“In contrast, in Pakistan, we prioritise constitution and law over national defence. We have sidelined our defence and army. We pushed aside the military courts, " he lamented.

Continuing his criticism, he slammed the judicial system's cases such as Reko Diq, attributing massive financial losses to its decisions, expressing frustration at what he called erratic rulings impacting the country negatively.

“You made someone ‘sadiq and ameen’, and disqualified someone else while qualifying another. Today, a panel of five members might disqualify, while a panel of seven could revoke that decision and qualify again."

Read Disqualification: CJP Isa flags glaring mismatch

"Today, Imran Khan may be behind bars, but through legal rulings, he might return tomorrow," he stated, expressing concern over what he deemed to be regressive effects due to inconsistent legal decisions.

"Our country has regressed by five hundred years because of the lack of continuity in legal decisions," Vawda lamented.

Vawda further said that Pakistan cannot score a century in a cricket match. “However, due to the judicial system and its injustices, the country is progressing at a rate that may even surpass a double or triple century.”

The former minister expressed disapproval of the Supreme Court’s decision to demolish Nasla Tower, a 15-storey residential building situated at the intersection of Sharae Faisal and Shahrah-e-Quaideen in Karachi.

"You brought down Nasla Tower and hailed its demolition. Yet, it left people devastated, forcing them onto the streets, pleading for help. Children are now out on the streets," he stated.

However, the real culprits were allowed to go scot-free. "The builder, the NOC provider, the architect, the minister, the leader—none of them faced any consequences," he lamented.

Commenting on the hanging of former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto – alleged to be “the judicial murder” – the former minister criticised the wrongful execution of Bhutto.

He regretted that in the aftermath of the judiciary’s decision to execute the former premier, three generations from his lineage subsequently entered politics.

"Today, you acknowledge it was a wrongful decision. How can Bhutto be brought back to life then? When will accountability be established for your error?" he questioned.

Read Bilawal asks SC to live telecast ZAB’s case hearing

"Then you oust anyone you wished based on the judgment of 'sadiq and ameen' and brought back others whimsically."

Furthermore, he emphasised the need to rectify the judicial system, which, he noted, was their responsibility. "If our turban falls due to this failure in the system, then no one will remain with a turban."

“There are allegations that judges' sons have amassed vast wealth and influenced court decisions. There are recorded audios and videos. When will these individuals face consequences?” Vawda asked.

Faisal Vawda also called into question the selective stance on human rights, alleging a contradictory stance regarding privatisation, portraying it as a human rights issue while overlooking similar concerns in past scenarios.

"The courts claim they won't permit privatisation, citing it as a human rights matter. But where was this concern for human rights during times of destruction and crisis for the military?" he questioned.

He continued, highlighting incidents where human rights violations were overlooked. "Amid street shootings and appalling crimes, did the courts not observe human rights violations? What about the rights of the girl subjected to torture, rape, and a horrific murder captured on video?"

"I often draw a comparison between Pakistan's political landscape, electoral processes, and the democratic system with a PIA flight. Even after assuming power, there's no assurance that the court's verdict is infallible,” he remarked.

“There's no certainty that those ousted yesterday will be reinstated tomorrow,” he added.