Adil Najam
The news of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s reinstatement made one feel good. Real good. After a long time. It reminded one of all that we have been through. It reminded one, also, that exactly two year’s ago ATP had published the result of a Poll on whether the CJ’s removal was the right move. Maybe, the powers that were should have heeded our reader’s advice right then and spared themselves and everyone the ordeal:
(This Poll was conducted 2 years ago)
As I mentioned on NPR’s show All Things Considered today (read and listen to story here), I think what has happened has been truly revolutionary. However, as one wrote yesterday, the story is far from over. It has just taken the newest twist. It is a good twist. But we know much more is to follow. But what?
We do remember, of course, that he had been reinstated earlier too – by his peers in the Supreme Court. We also remember that promises and announcements are made by our political leaders to be broken. We also note that in listening to the speech it is not clear exactly what the terms of the decision are and exactly what the nature of the reinstatement will be. Also unclear is what the new power dynamics in Pakistan will be after this demonstration of the power of the people. It is very clear that this is a moral and political victory not of any political party or political leader but of the Pakistani people and of the Justice movement. But we also know that victory has a thousand fathers and many, including the vanquished will seek to take credit for it.
In short, more questions than answers loom before us and all indications suggest that things may become more unclear in the next many weeks than less.
But let me be totally clear, this is good unclarity, even necessary unclarity. What we have seen today is truly historic. As I have argued many times on this blog it was proved again that Pakistan is a democratic society trapped inside an undemocratic State. For two years now a citizen movement – a movement of progressive, liberal, educated, non-violence forces – persevered in the face of hardship, jailings, persecution, and ridicule even of their friends. And yet they fought on – non-violently and in a principled way – for an abstract idea. The idea that institutions matter. That justice matters.
For this to have happened in a society where too many on the extreme are trying to make points by violence (as extremists tried to do again today), where zealots and miscreants murder and cut off people’s ears and noses simply because they do not agree with them, where innocent people are blown up because of one’s misguided sense of religiosity, for this to have happened and for such major change to have come about in a peaceful way makes one very very happy. Ecstatic really.
Jinnah’s spirit must be smiling today. I certainly am.
But tomorrow, we all have to start asking ourselves the question: What next? The answers won’t be easy, but one hopes that people will show the same clarity of purpose they did here. There will be many questions. Here are some I can think of. I am sure our readers will add more questions. I am hopeful that they might also guide us on a few answers:
- Will this become Nawaz Sharif’s victory? If so, what will that mean for the power dynamics of Pakistan. If not, what does that mean for the power dynamics of Pakistan?
- Asif Ali Zardari remains the President. Bruised, beaten and weakened. But President nonetheless. Gen. Musharraf made an art-form of retreating under pressure and each time things became worse. How will it play out now?
- What about the dynamics within the PPP. A number of senior PPP leaders have been sidelined or have dropped out (including Aitizaz Ahsan). Does this mean that they will be brought back in – or might force their way back. What does this mean for the future of the PPP; with or without Zardari?
- What about the current court, including the new inductees and the balance of opinion in the Court? How would a reinstated Chief Justice Chaudhry act in that Court, especially on issues of political significance? Will he be able to act or will the media made every case before him a circus?
- And even if everything goes without hitch, what is the future of the amazing Citizen’s Movement that has been constructed here? My own hope is that a new politics may emerge in Pakistan around the faces and frameworks of this movement and that it will remain true to its aspirations rather than succumbing to political temptations.
There are, of course, so many other questions.
But the real one remains: What next?
Finally, someone has said what needed to be said… kudos to Ayesha and Bloody Civilian for highlighting the other side of the coin…
Ayesha A S, none of your facts nor your conclusions can be reasonably disagreed with. CJ Chaudhry became a symbol. Quite separate than his rather petty person. Similarly, his one stand on March 9, 2007, also became symbolic. Again, quite apart from his rather shameful stands in the past.
It would have been great if he had treated this re-instatement as a restoration of his honour, since he was illegally dismissed, and think betond his own self and bow out. Opt for retirement. I don’t think he will.
Similarly, it would be great if NS would live up to his rhetoric about the rule of law and supremacy of law, and show that he is prepared to follow the spirit, and not just the letter, of the law by rebuking the PML(Q) forward bloc… in the ‘spirit’ if 63(a), rather than finding loopholes in the wording of the law.
Of course, PPP should immediately lift Governor Rule, which should never have been imposed.. and leave it to the legislature to exercise its mandate.
Or, I could stop dreaming and return to the real world.
In January 2000, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, then a serving judge of the Baluchistan High Court was one of the first judges to take oath on the Provisional constitution order (PCO).This allowed him to be elevated to the supreme court to fill one of the vacancies left by the 11 judges who had resigned in protest at taking this oath.
On April 13 2005, in the “Judgment on the 17th amendment and Presidents’ uniform case “, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was one of 5 supreme court judges who dismissed all petitions challenging President Musharraf’s constitutional amendments. In a wide ranging judgment , they declared that the legal framework order (LFO) by General Musharraf after his suspension of constitution, the 17th amendment which gave this constitutional backing, and the two offices bill which allowed Musharraf to retain his uniform whilst being President were all legal. With me so far?
However, in 2007 Musharraf declared a state of emergency, suspended the national constitution and issued yet another PCO in it’s place.
Only this time, Justice Chaudhry constitute an Eight member bench of the supreme court judges headed… duly by himself and immediately quashed the provisional constitution order (PCO), declaration of emergency and ordered all civil military personnel to ignore the order. He also ordered all the chief justices of the high courts and judges of the Supreme Court and high court not to take oath under the PCO.
My point being: Is it okay for one PCO and taking oath under it be fine because it is elevating one to desired position of importance, but another which takes away your esteemed position be wrong? Shouldn
U.S. Senate Report on Zardari’s Money Laundring.
===================================
Go about 40% down the document and start reading from “(2) Asif Ali Zardari Case History”.
Alternatively, do search using Find to look for “Asif Ali Zardari Case History” in the document.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/110999_report.htm
No wonder, Zardari loves NRO and leaves Musharraf alone.
Watan Aziz, good points. While one can never argue against independence of the judiciary, it will take a long time before the judiciary will be mature enough not to misuse it. Justice (retd) Qayyum, pathetic character as he is, had a heart attack after receiving a series of phone calls from Saif-ur-Rehman, and at least one from Khalid Anwar, when he was hearing BB’s case. Luckily, he happened to be in his medical doctor brother’s surgery at the time of the heart attack. It’s all in the phone tap records that Reman Malik flew to London with.
On the other hand, an independent judiciary is likely to make life impossible for the executive. Even now, while they don’t give verdicts against the executive, most every day civil servants dread a day in court because the judges take perverse pleasure in humiliating them. Indeed, it is not unknown for a High Court Jugde to call a civil servant a few days before he is due to appear in court, and demand a favour, e.g. a job for his man etc.
A free media is unlikely to stop at ripping a bad decision apart, but would rather rip the judge to pieces. In the more conservative Pakistani society, it’s easier for the media to slander a judge and do serious damage. There have been the notorious ‘naming and shaming’ judges campaigns in the British media, for example, clearly infringing on their independence and peace of mind. In Pakistan, the judges are likely to retaliate with an avalanche of contempt of court proceedings against the media.
We have just seen how incapable of objectivity and how lacking in professionalism the media has been. I have been fully behind the lawyers’ movement.. even participated in it. But I do not wish to see a blinkered, one-sided and immature media. If media and the judiciary can show some professionalism and maturity, it will become very difficult for the executive to deny them independence…. as long as the people remain vigilant and don’t now forget that their opinion matters. As for the people becoming a bit more mature, we would need regular elections, i.e. the military staying in the barrack for the next 20/30 years.