The Tone of Voice, My Lord
The Lahore High Court has ordered the making of the Kalabagh Dam. Let us keep technical and personal opinions on the desirability of making the dam aside for a moment. The highest Court in “Punjab” has “ordered” the making of a dam against which the other three provinces have passed resolutions in the past. And hold clear and public positions. Reflect on this for a moment. This is the month of December, with the 16th just a few days away. It is also dispiriting that this comes so soon after the Asghar Khan decision. The fleeting moment of hope where the Supreme Court said that no institution alone can be the final adjudicator of “national interest” is gone now. A provincial High Court has decided for all of us what “national interest” is. Given the interest of My Lords in poetry as exhibited by their judgments, one feels a slight tremor in reminding them of Habib Jalib and “Jaag meray Punjab ke Pakistan chala” No one province can decide “National interest.”
The legal argument briefly is that the Court has held that it is binding on the federal government to implement the decision taken by the Council of Common Interests (CCI) taken in 1991. Never mind that the 1990 election in consequence of which the particular CCI came into existence was rigged, as we officially know now. Never mind that the CCI before the 18th Amendment was weak and in practice almost defunct. Never mind that it is unclear if the LHC will also provide for the financing of the dam or not.
Is it possible, My Lord, that the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court did not know about the stated position of the other provinces on the matter? We know that our Lordships generally are very up-to-date on what is covered in the media. Not only taking frequent suo-motu notices but also reprimanding and restraining the media from criticising the judiciary and their judgments. I think we can safely assume that the Court knew the implications of the decision. Then, the next question is even more disturbing: did My Lord not care about this? Perhaps he did care and felt he knew better. Perhaps My Lord gave a new interpretation to Karl Marx’s statement, “they cannot represent themselves, they must be represented”.
The Kalabagh Dam represents the six-decade long challenge of federalism and perhaps the national question. I say this with the utmost of humbleness, but no one body or person has the power or capacity to resolve this challenge. Questions of national identity are not solved by proclamations from above. Not even by someone as learned and as temperate as My Lord the Chief Justice of the LHC.
The intention of My Lord is, indeed, noble; however, we will have to fight this battle on our own.
My Lords cannot decide political matters for us and if they do, then they cannot expect unquestioning obedience. I urge everybody to read the excellent report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) on how My Lords do not like criticism. It seems that a certain segment of our “independent” (synonymous with uncritically pro-judiciary these days) media has taken it upon themselves to respond to the balanced critique of the HRW on behalf of the Court by starting a shameful smear campaign of yellow journalism against the HRW and the brilliant, indomitable Syed Ali Dayan Hasan. The internationally established credibility of Ali Dayan and the HRW are not going to be affected by this. However, My Lords, you do not need sycophantic friends/foot soldiers like these, you are better off listening to the sane advice of the HRW.
My Lords have already taken up the role of economic and energy management with their decision to set the CNG prices. Here again, My Lords are not particularly concerned about demand and supply. For example, lowering the CNG prices for private automobiles raises demand for it, which means more diversion from the industry, causing unemployment, food shortages (if fertiliser factories close because Toyota Corollas with CNG are being preferred). However, making the right choice might not be “popular”. Not popular with the right constituency. The Lawyers’ Movement was spearheaded by the urban middle class. My Lords, the “awam” does not have automobiles, CNG fitted or not. The “awam” needs a better public transport system. And that is a job that the government/s has/have to perform. We appreciate the concern; however, My Lords, although being undeniably jurists par excellence, are not economists. And their opinion on the matter should not be binding. My Lords have the mandate of interpreting and implementing laws. If they want to run this country, I am afraid they will have to resign and contest elections. Just a gentle cautionary note, then it becomes harder to restrain people from criticising. Popularity always has a downside.
There are people who do not understand that if an institution or a province wants to act for the betterment of the entire country, why anyone should have a problem with that. For them, let me conclude with Simon Raven’s, Sound the Retreat, where a British army officer is having a conversation with a native on the eve of independence. The Colonel asks, “Why are you so keen to get rid of us, Munshi sahib.” Munshi responds, “Because we wish to run our own affairs. We shall not order them as efficaciously as you do, my God, no, but then efficacy is not important to us, you understand…”. Colonel, “It’s your fault. You will insist on the British leaving”. To which the native Munshi replies, “Partly because we do not like to be spoken to in that tone of voice”.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 2nd, 2012.
COMMENTS (23)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Brilliant as ever!
@abu uzhur: Brilliant thank you sir :)
Keep it up Saroop
@Zain Chaudhry: You have every right to have your point of view and express it. But it must reflect a point of view not mere rhetoric and empty words. "Words are like leaves; and where they most abound, Much fruit of sense beneath is rarely found," Alexander Pope.
@Zain Chaudhry:
" These liberal hawks are no different from the takfiri terrorists "
Please explain and substantiate your assertion quoted above .
How many suicidal attacks have the liberal hawks launched on mosques imambaras
and market places of Pakisran killing innocent men women and children ?
How many defence establishments of Pakistan have they attacked, killing our jawans
and officers ?
How many girls' schools have they bombed into rubble ?
How many churches and mandirs have they torched ?
Any instance of liberal hawks imposing their views on others with threats of violence
and intimidation ?
Any liberal hawks defying the writ of the state as the takfiri terrorists do ?
CJ Punjab should not decide for Sindh and KPK.
This is nothing more than an alarmist nonsense. No-one disagrees with the assertion that courts should not have too much power, and that the media mustn't be muzzled by any institution (including the courts, armed forces, businessmen, owners, politicians...). The intellectual limitations and insecurities of people like Saroop Ijaz are exposed by this behaviour: anyone who disagrees with them is the devil incarnate, a 'lifafa' journalist, a sell-out, a corrupt, unintelligent journalist. The hegemony of the truth lies with Saroop Ijaz and his friends. This is exactly what makes these liberal hawks no different from the religious extremists - each has no doubt in their positions. They know the truth. Anyone who differs slightly must be damned. These liberal hawks are no different from the takfiri terrorists - there's simply a religious and a non-religious takfiri cult.
Criticising the courts is highly fashionable. They are highly assertive, and aggressive in going after the criminals, which leads to baseless criticism. After all, we are used to bureaucrats, journalists, and the people quietly taking their medicine, and remaining passive and neutral on a moving train. They are an easy target: it's something highly visible, and it's a matter discussed in the media, hence it doesn't require much thinking nor any research (if one is interested in nonsense allegations only, of course). It would be far harder to do something against those who are muzzling the media each and every day - the owners, the businessmen, the politicians, the cable operators - who are each day paying journalists , or otherwise using their influence, to spout lies and control access to information.
The problem with many intellectuals and academics (I am one myself) and pundits is this: they live in bubbles. Saroop Ijaz hammering the courts every other day shows the same pathetic behaviour, the same irresponsibility and cavalier attitude towards the truth that was shown by the economists who built mathematically elegant, but otherwise useless models of the financial system and declared it safe. The idea of a public intellectual, his/her critical duties are treated as unimportant and unworthy of much research and thinking before spouting nonsense. There is no understanding of their responsibility that each word uttered in the public as an expert means something, it changes something, and hence one must speak responsibly.
How many people, including the supposedly extraordinary Ali Dayan, and Saroop Ijaz and other friends have actually done research on this matter? How many of them have actually studied the courts' orders? How many followed their actions fully on these matters after the orders? How many bothered to carefully watch each show (or let's be charitable, just the 'important' ones) to ascertain if there was any criticism of the judiciary on the media, or none at all? After all, had they been able to find such shows (which do exist), it would probably have led them to the conclusion that the courts weren't really muzzling criticism, they were stopping those who were making ridiculously low and vulgar allegations against the judges. An organisation like HRW that constantly berates governments for being un-transparent ironically is now itself totally unwilling to show any real research behind their statement. The response to criticism from The News is a vilification campaign (not that the other side is whiter than white either), not transparency, not research. Can you imagine how this debate would have panned out had Ali Dayan, instead of vilifying others simply posted a PDF document on HRW showing precisely how they reached their strong conclusions?
As long we this sense of certainty and intellectual superiority doesn't go away, we won't move forgot. We complain that politicians don't debate issues, but these pseudo-intellectuals are no different is offering only empty slogans, nothing more.
Was that not Justice Zia Mehmood Mirza the lone dissenting Judge?
Judges are too myopic to be trusted with national issues. They are slaves of rules made for them some one else.
Contents of decision read " No institution has power to decide national interest except Judiciary".
@Sultan khan: the court just observed that per NFC,18th amend the CCI judgement was binding. This interpretation can be challenged in SC. The case can be again heard in CCI. The court did not say build the dam or else. The executive has final say.
Once again a Brilliant article !
Was that not Justice Zia Mehmood Mirza?
Absolutely right! The decision is well outside judicial ambit and a trespass into policy making. It is controversial and likely to provoke outrage. The tone of voice takes root from a genuine misapprehension widely shared by milords that they, by virtue of having appointed themselves sole guardians of the electorates' well being are our masters. Notwithstanding all of the above and while wishing that this judgement is speedily overturned I do hope that Kalabagh project will receive another chance.
Simply Brilliant. U R a bravo!
Brilliant as always, Saroop!!
Brilliant as always Saroop. As an Indian I obviously do not have any knowledge or opinion of whether Kalabagh dam is good for Pakistan or not. I was however surprised that a provincial high court thought it fit to rule on an issue which has national character and where 2 other provinces - who are also stakeholders are completely against its building.
The hounrable court has given PPP a new life in Sindh. PML(N) and opposition parties in Sindh were expected to give PPP a very tough fight but after this order, Sindh will fall again in the PPP's lap. The outcome of next general election will not fluctuate more than ten percent. LHC has done what Imran and establishment failed to do.
Again a very well reasoned and brilliantly written piece. The Kalabag dam issue is an issue not of a technical nature but of mistrust between the provinces and possibly there is substance that has promoted this mistrust which will have to be cleared by the guilty party showing that it can be trusted and agreeing to a formula that satisfies all.