Adil Najam
In a highly anticipated and awaited verdict, the Pakistan Supreme Court just declared the steps taken by then President Gen. Pervez Musharraf illegal. The details of the decision read out by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry are still filtering in and the implications of the decision are still not fully clear. I am still grappling with what this will actually mean in implementation and would love to hear from you what you think it will mean?
It is clear from the judgment that this does NOT change the legality of the current government or of the oath taken by President Zardari. But will it effect only the judiciary decisions (judges and how many) or does it have farther reaching impacts. My sense is, it will. But I am not fully clear just yet what these will be, and how. With this decision, it seems the Supreme Court and Chief Justice are back in the news big time and maybe more than just the rhetoric will heat up!
According to details (still coming in) in The News:
The Supreme Court of Pakistan Friday declared the steps taken on November 3, 2007 by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional. The judgment came after the 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry completed the hearing of constitutional petitions regarding PCO judges, appointments of judges of higher judiciary and November 3, 2007 steps.
The Supreme Court in its short verdict declared the steps of November 3, 2007 taken by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional. Article 279 of the Constitution was violated on November 3, 2007, it said.
It termed as illegal and unconstitutional the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and the other higher judiciary as well as the appointment of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar as chief justice.
The oath taken by President Asif Ali Zardari will not be affected by the SC verdict, is said. All the appointments made in the higher judiciary of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar have been termed illegal. It termed as unconstitutional all the appointments of judges during November 3, 2007 to March 24, 2008. It said the strength of Supreme Court judges will remain 17. It declared unconstitutional all the steps taken by Pervez Musharraf during November 3, 2007 to December 15, 2007 including the increasing of number of superior judges through finance bill.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry announced the verdict.
The verdict said all the appointments of judges on and after November 3, 2007 under PCO were unconstitutional. The case of PCO judges will be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, it said. The announcement of today’s verdict sent a wave of jubilation outside the Supreme Court and at all the bar associations. Sweets are being distributed as people and lawyers are chanting slogans in support of the judiciary. The 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry reserved the judgment after completing the hearing of the case and announced it after a delay of over four and a half hour.
Some more comments from the ATP Facebook Page:
– “rape of country eh?? give me one leader who didnt do that.. phir to nawaz ko bhi phansi, zardari ko phansi, har aik ko phansi..”
– “aur altaf bhai ko bhee phansi”
– “my dear cant u see the difference between a blatant defiance of the constitution , and the law…..by an army officer………and the corruptions of politicians or civilian governments…..!! more than 80% of budget is spent on army and we civilians expect them to maintain strict loyalty to the country….the remaining 20% lies in the hands of politicians….kon karta hai corruption aur kahaan jata hai paisa……..aur unhe corrupt politicians ko saath mila kar hakomat karta raha musharraf
NIGHEBAAN BAN KE JO KHUD HE CHAMAN KE AABRO LOOTEY…..CHAMAN WALO AQEEDAT CHOR DO AISE NIGHEBAAN KE………..
chahe woh koi bhe ho!!!”
– “INSHALLAH phansi hogi musharuf ko jisterhan usney bay gunnah logo ko maara hay….
aameennnn”
– “Kis leader ne nahi mara be gunah logon ko???”
– “bhutto ko phansi hui….benzair was asssinated…nawaz and shebaz were sent away…kis dictator kay sath ajj tak kuch hua hai…….”
– “Agar musharraf ko pakistan ka future aziz na hota tu woh aj bhi pakistan ka president hota…Two major political parties of pakistan are just strengthening the future of their sons and daughters…they r not serving pakistan.. her aik ka beta tyar hai agay kursi per qabza karne k liye”
– “kisi leader ko b phansi dena galat hai… agar musharraf ko phansi di jati hai tu yeh aik aur galti hogi”
– “halatt badal rahey hain dear frends,ab awam jagg chuki ha,inqalab aney wala ha.ali mery bahi ab aisa nai ho ga.”
– “Today I came to klnow that our common man is prosperous because public has no interest in law & order, terrorism, unemployment, insecurity, inflation and other, rather the news channels claimed, “The whole nation waiting for the decision”. The decision took sometime but at the endruling came nullifying all post November 3 steps EXCEPT the ELECTION, The PM, the PRESIDENT and their decision to restore judiciary. The theory of necessity appeared to be valid again.”
– “musharraf was the best best man for pakistan, take a look what our current leaders has done for pakistan besides giving pakistanis a bad name.”
– “dictators ka waqiai koi kuch nai bigar saka,magr is main b qasoor hamara apna ha.”
– “a historic step towards independent judiciary(Pakistan)”
– “A blunt and inappropriate revenge by the Chief ”Injustice” !!”
@Takhalus,
You are right! This is not different-enough from the Amina Gilani case which decreed Yahya Khan as the ‘userper’ but only AFTER Yahya had burnt-up his star power.
I also think today’s judgement has at least a hint of the (in)-famous ‘Nazrya e Zaroorat’ (Doctrine of Necessity) of a 2009 version.
But I welcome it still. I really think the Establishment of Pakistan has been so weakened by the ‘blowback’ effect–President Musharraf was nearly killed twice and a Corps Commander in Karachi (Gen. Ahsan?) was also nearly killed–that the Establishment is hellbent on concentrating on its own job–manning the borders of Pakistan (Army is the most powerful exclusionary power of the Pakistani Establishment).
What Pakistan needs is a ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ at this point which would be a super-NRO. Start from 1977–a date I very consciously choose because, prior to that, Zia ‘cleaned up’ the PPP thoroughly–and find out the compliant judges, adventurist Generals, and of course the ‘corrupt’ politicians. Start from there before prosecuting/persecuting a lone Musharraf otherwise it would be a failed ‘Amir ul Mominoon’ now wanting his revenge.
how is this different from the Amina Jilani verdict? bolting the stable doors after the horses have bolted?
I cannot forecast the future. However, I was extremely happy when I heard this news on NPR here in Washington DC while coming back from work. Army, one of the three power centers who control Pakistan destiny has finally been removed as the major power. Never again a high school graduate army general will be able to become head of state in Pakistan. I am hopeful that the middle class and civil society which is represented by lawyers and media will also be able to get rid of the two other power centers, the sons and brothers of feudal lords and corrupt industrialists from government.
What does this mean? Not much. Is it a surprise? Hardly. Even Musharraf had hinted that the constitutionality
of his Nov. 3 actions was suspect. The Supreme Court has taken this decision because it could.
Ordinarily, judges recuse themselves from cases where they may seem to have a personal interest. In this case, all judges, whether PCO or LFO or any other kind you can think of were a party to this case. So, was there a competent institution who could have sat in judgment of this case? I can’t think of one. These are the kinds of dilemmas we find
ourselves in when legality and constitutionality is declared selectively – in most cases where it is convenient.
It sure does open a can of worms; NRO, Musharraf’s future, cases against Sharifs and Zardari etc. But, not to worry,
selective application of the law, decision making of convenience and our old friend the doctrine of necessity are
establishment’s multi-purpose tools that will ensure that changes, if any, are only on the fringes.