What looked like a riposte to Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, President Asif Ali Zardari said on July 19 in Karachi that parliament was supreme as it expressed the will of the people. He said that “parliament had every right to enact laws and would continue to do so in the future”. The chief justice had earlier said that the “Constitution trumped all institutions” and stood supreme in Pakistan instead of parliament. Very soon, the judiciary will have occasion to give its verdict on the matter when it hears the case against the ruling coalition’s passage of a law relating to contempt of court.
The presidential remark was also a repartee to the Lahore High Court, which ordered him “to cease using the presidency for political purposes by September this year”. His answer to the order was given to party men and allies gathered around him: parliament was his constituency and that no law barred the president from meeting his constituents. He asserted: “No one can bar me from meeting with elected representatives of the PPP in the presidency. You have elected me and I have become president because of your votes”. He added that “those who want to restrict political forces would not succeed”.
If he sounded overly aggressive, he quickly applied the palliative: “It is necessary for the system’s stability that every state institution respects the mandate of other institutions. However, while some institutions may, at times, appear to be overstepping their mandate in developing democracies, this is part of the system’s evolution and should not be a matter of concern”. The world outside, too, is aware of what is happening in Pakistan and has been advising ‘restraint’ to the Supreme Court and asking it not to get into the vicious circle of precedents of disqualifying prime ministers.
The judiciary has been maltreated in the past and books have been written about how the judges in Pakistan were humiliated by dictators and military rulers. The judiciary, today, is responding to this past record and is trying to prove to an admiring civil society that it is possible for the courts to stand up to coercion and challenge rulers defaulting on governance and luxuriating instead in corruption. President Zardari, while rightly putting on record his opinion about the supremacy of parliament, must also be mindful of the abysmal performance of the party in power. It is very difficult to stand up to a court that enjoys the support of civil society, to say nothing of the opposition hitting the road all guns firing trying to topple the government.
There are other factors the people of Pakistan must keep in mind in the interest of fairness. If the executive is constantly hounded by other institutions and made to feel insecure, the outreach of the executive would be curtailed and service delivery affected; ministers feeling unsure about survival in power would begin to indulge in graft. In Pakistan, some factors are atypical of the Third World paradigm. There is terrorism to cope with, which successfully exercises intimidation to persuade the politicians to blink terrorism when it happens against the ruling party. Since law and order is the domain of the provinces, most damage is done not at the federal level but at the grass roots. On top of that, there is the reality of the supremacy of the army, which seems unable to defend the citizen either against the terrorist or foreign invasion.
President Zardari also took cognisance of the growing disenchantment of the Sindhi hinterland with the PPP leadership. There is much to be said about the feudal aspects of the party with firm constituencies but neglect of rapidly growing cities in Sindh’s interior. The PPP faces the challenge of the nationalist parties in the interior where Sindhis complain of leaders who live comfortably in Karachi and rarely visit them. This has allowed the PML-N to plant its feet more firmly in Sindh, even as Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf makes inroads in Punjab and urban Sindh.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 23rd, 2012.
COMMENTS (15)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Mirza: oh so innocent PPP . grow up or it would be late Mirza !
Mr President "Parliment is supreme". Yes it is supreme according to the to the will of Pakistani people. What is will of the Pakistani people? Here is the will of Pakistani People "People of Pakistan support Swiss Accounts, They support a Pakistan with out Electricity, They support soaring Prices, They support corruption, They support lawlessness, They support to get rid off Steel Mill, they support to destroy PIA, They support to close the Railway, They support that all politicians are above the law, they support the idea of NRO for all corrupt personalities, they support illiterate law makers, they support drone attacks, they support Nato Supply, they support a Pakistan without Constitution, They support that taxes should be paid by poor to build up the Swiss Accounts of all Politicians, They support a Pakistan without justice, they support illiterate nation, they support that Pakistan is made for Peers, Syeds, Makhdooms, Chauhdaries, Landlords, Criminals, Dacoits, Looters, Sardars, Mians, Khans and not for the Pakistani people, They suppot to kill all poor, They are happy to be burried alive". All this to keep the supermacy of the Parliment. A Parliment which consists of angels, angels of Azab. Angels who have a stomach bigger than this earth, stomach wider than the sea, these angels are always hungry for Dollars, Pounds, but these angels reject all kind of Halal stuff. The fundemental duty of these angels is to create troubles for Pakistani People. Pakistani People are not allowed to eat, sleep, or rest because Parlimet is supreme. People of Pakistan are enjoying the acts of this supreme Parliment. This all because the People of Pakistan voted for this supreme evil. Have it all in the name of Supreme Parliment.
@Toticalling: "Well said. It shows Indian democracy has matured. I wish I could say the same from this side of the border."
Wish you good luck. This is the first time that there is an opportunity for a government to finish its full term. As governments finish their terms, as people get thrpown out for poor performance, people in Pakistan will also trust the process more. But there is need for patience. IT did not happen overnight in India and it would be unreasonable to expect that for Pakistan either.
On bbc.com/Urdu .the editor who just returned from pakistan said that this time round when he met his friends and other people., he found people bit depressed and the only conversation that was carried out was corruption of chief justices family and that ZARDARI was a master politician,, a judges family involved in corruption ,rightly or wrongly ,can be presumed to have advantage this reduces the moral authority of supreme court
This apt repeated slogan that the Judiciary has a support of the people of Pakistan is very questionable. Yes, the people of Pakistan supported CJ when he was ousted by Musharraf, but it did not elect them for life. People has the right to review their decision based on the performance of the institution. Courts have failed in doing their duties and failed in solving the problems of the people. The courts still takes years to decide some very petty and straight cases. Corruption, inefficiency and expensive justice still looms on our heads. People are still victims of Bench and Bar excessive expenditures. people still run from pillar to post to get justice. Judiciary played lot of politics after it was restored by political movement. They still enjoy converting the court rooms into rallies. Still enjoy cutting jokes on those who submit themselves before the courts for justice.
@gp65: * I repeat after you: I am sure the people of India will punish them in the next elections. But unless and until, Manmohan Singh loses a motion of confidence in the parliament, he has a right to remain the PM. I would be the first one to oppose if some judge decided to throw out Manmohan Singh' Well said. It shows Indian democracy has matured. I wish I could say the same from this side of the border.
In any Democracy the people as represented by their elected representatives Parliament is supreme. Parliament alone is responsible for making and striking down Laws. At best the Courts can only send back the Law to Parliament for reconsideration but has to ultimately implement it. That Courts have sympathized with Dictators and never with Democratically elected leaders is tragic and sad.
No, it is not true that the parliament could pass any law and be the law of the land, Laws which are passed by mere rubber stamp parliament with malice could be challenged in the Supreme Court of Pakistan and rightly so. Some laws are passed within hours completely disregarding the constitution, and without any input by the people or the opposition, which could not stand the scrutiny because they were made to defend few individuals and not beneficial for the whole country, therefore it is wrong to assume that the parliament is supreme and it's decision can't be challenged in the court of law. We have some legislators who could not even understand the implications of the consequences for what they are voting for , they do so because they are loyalty to the party chief , and the heck with the constituents. Zardari was a bad choice and those who put him there should be answerable come next elections, perhaps I am asking too much from a nation who has put these same corrupt lot time after time.
Mr.Mirza,your refering to PPP as the only nationalist party and blah blah * needs a few addition "it is the party purchasing votes"
My Pakistani friends, have faith in your own power to punish corruption and incompetence - do not hand over your power to an unelected authority. Today this authority (CJ) is taking decisions you like, tomorrow it may not, but once you have given up your power, it will be difficult to get it back.
What I don't understand is that these very same judges have ruled that doctrine of necessity does not justify military dictatorship and yet for all practical purposes they are using the same arguments to justify judicial overreach.
The truth is Pakistan is not that different from India when it comes to corruption in society. The current UPA government in India is highly corrupt. Millions of people had come out against their corruption during Anna Hazaae movement to get some institutional controls o reduce corruption. But as much as I dislike the UPA government and its dynastic approach, they have earned their right to rule fair and square. I am sure the people of India will punish them in the next elections. But unless and until, Manmohan Singh loses a motion of confidence in the parliament, he has a right to remain the PM. I would be the first one to oppose if some judge decided to throw out Manmohan Singh.
As I read newspapers and watch tv programme civil society is actually embarrassed by the behavior of the courts Only people supporting their adventurism are failed and failing politicians. Abysmal performance ?? ok then same court gave legal cover to musharafs mutiny against a well performing PMLN government. There is no evidence that people believe the propaganda of non performance ..This has been VISIBLE during all by elections The auteur is using the same justification that was used by Ishaq khan and lagari Please don't let your country to the shame of being ruled by Army and few disgruntled judges
I agree with both of u mirza and sanjay for your comments and editor also made good points too
"President Zardari, while rightly putting on record his opinion about the supremacy of parliament, must also be mindful of the abysmal performance of the party in power. It is very difficult to stand up to a court that enjoys the support of civil society, to say nothing of the opposition hitting the road all guns firing trying to topple the government."
Sounds like if ruling party does not perform well, the judicial activism by a Court is perfectly all right in throwing representatives out of power who were duly elected by the people of a country. How will you gauge the mood of civil society appearing to be totally against the present government? Democracy does not run on the moods of civil society, but run by the parliament, who is elected by the people in order to safeguard the constitution. Court can interpret Law but it cannot be an instrument to weaken the democracy by sheer activism. People have right to choose or reject their representatives after they complete their term in parliament.