Confusion unconfounded
On February 13, a charge sheet against the prime minister of the federation was read out in the Supreme Court: “You, Yousaf Raza Gilani, the prime minister of Pakistan, have willfully flouted and disobeyed the direction given by this Court ... and therefore, you committed contempt of court ... We hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on above said charge (sic.)”.
No need to repeat the direction, though many may be forgiven for forgetting it as it all happened over two and a half years ago, during which period both Court and prime minister dragged their respective feet.
On April 26, the Court sprang to life — as headlined in the press it was ‘D-Day’, ‘The moment of reckoning’, the ‘PM to face justice’, and ‘All eyes on Supreme Court’. Well, according to the learned brethren of the Bench “the contempt committed ... tends to bring this Court and the judiciary of the country into ridicule”. Fair enough and by and large, apart from the party in power, all could not but agree. “... As regards the sentence to be passed against the convict we note that the findings and conviction for contempt of court ... ”. It was duly noted, then in the space of 32 seconds the ‘system’ was saved and preserved and presumably justice was done.
Was the ‘convict’ chastised? Not a bit. He was jubilant, as were what are known as his supporters, his bank of merry party people. Adding to the former two-and-a-half-year long ridicule were the rose petals flung in joyous jubilation and down in the prime ministerial home town, the heroic legal fraternity, staunch upholders of the independence of the judiciary, reportedly ‘performed’ bhangra and distributed sweets. The post-sentencing behaviour of deluded men who seem destined never to grow up, devoid of dignity or decorum, certainly did little in international eyes to lessen whatever ridicule had been heaped upon the country by the prolonged clash between two of the pillars that are in place to uphold the dignity, integrity and what have you, of the federation.
What was it that the Court ‘noted’? Well, only an article of the Constitution, which states that a person stands disqualified from being a member of parliament if “he has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for ... acting in any manner prejudicial to ... the integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan or which defames or brings into ridicule the judiciary ... ”. In which case, the Speaker of the National Assembly is required to refer “any question” that may arise as to the disqualification of a member to the election commission with 30 days, whereafter the election commission will decide the matter within 90 days.
What is the betting that the Constitution will be flouted again? The prime minister maintained that by writing the letter as ordered he would be acting unconstitutionally, thereby directly implying that the Supreme Court itself was in conflict with the Constitution by ordering him to act unconstitutionally. And the Constitution itself is a mass of confusion of conflicting articles.
The prime minister, it seems, intends to remain prime minister regardless of courts, constitutions or even convention. He is where he is because his boss and co-chairman of his party wants him there.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 5th, 2012.
COMMENTS (5)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
History will judge this judiciary as the worst bunch of judges our country ever had. The CJ is not concentrating to improve the functioning of lower courts which should be his first priority. His all efforts and actions are to witch-hunt the PPP only, which is evident from over exposing in the media, taunting and unfavorable observations by SC judges during proceedings, and running the SC as a trade union. Since he is reinstated, dissent and/or diversity of thoughts are nowhere in the SC decisions. Judges are seem to work mechanically and endorsing ” given ” decisions instead of applying their own free minds, Pending cases and corruption are rapidly increasing in all courts. This should be the real and top most challenge for the CJ. I hope the better sense will prevail sooner than the latter and “all” citizens of Pakistan will finally get the cheap and speedy justice equally, which was dreamt during the lawyers movement for restoration of ” free ” judiciary.
The same Prime Minister claimed that they meaning the Judiciary did not understand that he was not a Peon but a Prime Minister. Its remarkable how pathetic the minds of the fools are who lead our failed devastated State. In the US, if our President were to utter such rubbish about the poorest man or that on the lowest totem pole, they would be thrown out of office, for all our politicians try to act as if they live substantially the same way as those on the lowest totem pole, yet in Pakistan convicts rule and ridicule the court, and the voter who works and earns an honest living as a peon; thus is far superior to any ideal that can be produced in humanity. Shame on Pakistanis for not taking these clowns to brook. these are illiterate clowns, who have raped the nation through corruption, incompetence, and pettiness, they would sell the nation in a heart beat. They want more provinces so others can share in the plunder of the nation, how can new provinces help, when one has failed to govern the current 4 provinces. For each problem they offer that Bhutto was killed by courts. NOW they are killing the courts.
The fact that all our politicians have neither morals nor shame is well known. The one fact that this episode has made clear is that the language of the supreme court is not the language that our politicians understand. The court should call those who are capable of speaking the lanuage and under its orders get the work done.
As a student of law, we were taught maxim of English jurisprudence ‘king can do no wrong’ but in Indian subcontinent, king can do wrong, he can be convicted and sentenced; but when it comes to punishment only symbolic punishment is given.
I am reminded of a story which, I read in school. In medieval time criminal justice was delivered by a magistrate who combined the roll of investigator, prosecutor and the judge. A murder was committed. No witness was coming forward. The magistrate after investigation learnt that killing was done by the king but was acting in self defense. The king was ordered to be produced before the court of Magistrate. There was vociferous opposition by king’s courtiers at this audacity on part of the Magistrate. The king on his production before the court was charged and tried. After trial was over, the judge pronounced the king guilty and further sentenced him to be hanged on the public crossing (Chauraha). The magistrate there after added; ‘King is representative of God; the King can only be punished by God’; but, to set an example for citizens; it was ordered that statute of king be hanged on public crossing.
The facts are stated accurately, although this has been said many a time before. I read a view by Hina Jilani who is an eminent lawyer and human-rights activist that Zardari accusations are over 14 years old. Could the court not have waited another year instead of putting the democratic set up in danger? I seem to agree with that. Try some of the people for corruption and mismanagement and not of a controversial interpretation of the constitution. But I agree PM should resign even when the judiciary seem one eyed An eye for an eye will make the world blind.