In the best interest of the nation?

After the disqualification of Pakistan’s former premier Yousuf Raza Gilani, the National Assembly drafted and passed the contempt of court bill. Amongst many other clauses, the bill stated that “A true averment made in good faith and temperate language for initiation of action or in the course of disciplinary proceedings against a judge, before the chief justices of the Supreme Court and high courts, the Supreme Judicial Council and the federal or provincial governments, shall not amount to contempt of court.”

The proposed contempt of court act 2012 provided immunity to all the important office holders including the president and prime minister.

Opposition leaders filed petitions against the law calling it a move against the constitution of Pakistan. The petitions were accepted by the Supreme Court and notices were issued to the federation and Attorney General to file their responses against the newly passed law.

After a week of arguments and counter-arguments, that involved honourable judges and the Attorney General, the court struck down the law declaring it illegal and unconstitutional.

The verdict restored the power of judiciary but was the move in the best interest of democracy or another attempt to manoeuvre the country into judicial dictatorships?

Was the contempt of court act 2012 passed to safeguard the rights of the few powerful officer bearers?

Is the tussle between judiciary and federation of Pakistan in the best interest of the nation or has it become another egotistical fight between the two institutions?

 

Comments Guide:
Dawn.com encourages its readers to share their views on our forums. We try to accommodate all users' comments but this is not always possible due to space and other constraints. Please our read our comments guidelines below for more information:

1. Please be aware that the views of our bloggers and commenters do not necessarily reflect Dawn.com's policies.

2. Though comments appear to have been published immediately after posting, they are actually forwarded to a moderation queue before publication.

3. Dawn reserves the right to remove or edit comments that are posted on this blog.

4. Language that is offensive to any race, religion, ethnicity, gender or nationality is not permitted.

5. Avoid posting comments in ALL CAPS. Commenters are also encouraged to avoid text contractions like 'u r.'

6. Do not cross-post comments across multiple blog entries.

7. Any comments posted to a blog entry should be relevant to the topic or discussion.

8. Do not spam the comment section.

92 Responses to “In the best interest of the nation?”

  1. Salman Ahmed says:

    This law was malafide and clearly brought in to meet the government’s own specific objectives.

    The judges absolutely did the right thing. The arguments presented by the government wallas on the various tv programmes show ignorance of law and ignorance of what a democratic system should be all about.

  2. Asif Shaikh says:

    It has always occured to me while listening and reading about all the recent important SC cases that the judges had already made up their minds about a case so all the arguments and proceedings seemed a futile excercise to me. They should just give a verdict on the first day; why waste time when media has told us what the result would be . Long Live judiciary- media partnership.

    • Abdul Waheed says:

      We always know that any writ against PPP weak government will be accepted and decided against PPP simply because this government is weak and helpless to take any action against judges. Like weak and poor people, PPP will punish its own people who will speak against powerful judiciary. The case of Faisal Raza Abidi is an example.

  3. Faraz says:

    The law was an absurdity and it provoked outrage in the educated echelons of society. There is no room for such a biased and unfair law just to protect the ill gotten gains of a president under whose rule democracy seems like a dictatorship whereas the dictatorships seemed like democracy.

    • Secular Paksitan says:

      These fuedals and so called public servants were elected to serve the people. Instead they spend most of their waking hours trying to figure out how to serve themselves. This law was just designed to secure the den of theives from accountability. Good call SC.

  4. fsl says:

    What Govt is doing is definitely not in the best interest of country either.

    • Kabir says:

      …and what judiciary is doing is even worst…… very soon nation would see the effects of both – what the govt and the judiaciary are doings

  5. Sameer says:

    Rule of law should be supreme, what is right is right. Why do people look at it as a tussle? This is the problem with all Pakistani’s, they don’t take anything is implementing the rule or doing the right thing. For them, its people taking sides with others for ulterior motives.

  6. MAK (usa) says:

    Contempt law passed by the parliament is tyrrany of the majority. It sanctions that elites are above the law , not accountable to judiciary, leading to mockery of the constitution. I hope SC sticks to its verdict. For the sake of one man,AAZ, parliament is being held hostage.

    • Asad Ali Kasuri says:

      This is not about one man. Its about the President of the country. If he is guilty then why not start a case in Pakistan. Why go all they way to Switzerland? After all he should be found guilty in Pakistan not outside of Pakistan.

      Secondly, since he is the President he has immunity. That is a global fact. Any head of state is immune until he is the head of state. Once he steps down then he can be tried.

      What Chaudhry is forgetting that it was Chaudhry’s court that allowed Musharraf to continue. Chaudhry himself is an NRO judge, which was declared by Chaurdhry to be illegal. So why does he not go to the President and get fresh oath?

  7. Keti Zilgish says:

    Speaking of judiciaries i have just come across a report that the present US Supreme Court is the most corrupt that there ever has been. It is, like the legislatures, completely bought over by corporations. To cope with this situation Americans are trying to harness the advantages of co-operatives based on mutual aid (rather than competition on which the corporations are based). These same corporations and their imperial and colonial ancestors have made sure that the land of the pure (Pakistan) is stuck up with competion based games like cricket in which politicians like Imran Khan were unknowingly harnessed and are now being supported by the trading classes (worshippers of money who’s god is mamon) all of who’s money will easily be used to buy themselves a government (would make a good research theses for students of Islamic History and Anthropology) to the detriment of the non-trading classes and thereby provoke further the intensity of the class war that has been raging for centuries and is only recently (in the past 30 or so years) being shoved (camouflaged) underneath the rug by linguistic racism and religious rivalry and intolerance.

  8. Zulfiqar Haider says:

    We have not matured to hold collective responsibility and authority. In the current tussle, the judiciary has given an impression that it shall not let go an opportunity in its way to rub the nose of parliament. Judicial dictatorship is harsh word, but it is fairly close to it. Parliament consists of peoples’ representative. You don’t like people and their representatives. Fine let us hand over the reins to 17 judges or 17 Core Commanders. We have genetic problems; we can’t be reasonable, we have to be fanatical.

    • Abid says:

      In my humble opinion Mr Haider’s commentary is a true reflection of his last line itself– “We have genetic problems; we can’t be reasonable, we have to be fanatical.” It is not about of like/dislike of people’s representatives, it is about corruption.

      Why doesn’t the government write a 4 line letter as order by SC and get over with it. Let it be determined who stashed that money there. Let the truth come out.

      The monster of corruption has chewed this nation to bones. Who will stop it after all?

      An independent judiciary, albeit active, is better than a Dogar court and its likes.

    • M. Tayyab says:

      this is not genetic problem, it is matter of constitutionalism and nothing else………………..unfortunately we can not understand.

      • M. Tayyab says:

        Mr. haider , have you read the the Contempt Law before commenting on judiciary?

        • Kabir says:

          It is matter of constitutionalism but not as Mr CJ sees and defines it. He is trying to redefine the meaning of democracy. Supremacy of constitution without a supreme parliament is a hollow dream. But is suits judiciary as they have to interprete the constitution. Contem law was a bad law but stretching the meaning of Fundamental rights too far was like amending the constitution which is something beyond the jurisdiction of the court. Thise who are seeing the judiciary from very close (and are not bised) would agree that judicialism is getting too close to dictatorship. It is ironic to see that judicial process is loosing the wisdom and following the dictate or desire. How come a bench of 5 or 7, 9 or even 17 judges think and interprete the constitution in one manner. there are no differences of opinion. this seems more like a group of self seekers as are the groups of politicians, land grabbers or even journalists.

  9. Muhammad Salman says:

    Factually speaking, immunity to all most senior officials including president and prime minister is un-lawful.

  10. M Rafique says:

    Another attempt to manoeuvre the country into judicial dictator ship.
    To safe guard the interest of the powerful on other side
    Without any doubt it is against the interest of the nation

  11. indian says:

    Institutions are used by people to fight their own fights. Inwould say in this case the judicial ego is endangering an elected govenment in Pakistan for apparantly no reasons.there are more important things for both the judiciary and the government to do than this charade.

    • Muhammad says:

      You are trying to be impartial between fire and fire brigade. In this case SC is right, government is wrong. You need to rethink your comments.

      • Abdul Waheed says:

        SC has become a big match and petrol which has lightened the fire and adding fuel to the fire and the fire is proving opportunity to certain lawyers / litigants to grab as much money as they can at the cost of deterioration of economic sources of the country.

  12. NASAH (USA) says:

    The 3 wise Brahmins of the Supreme Court and their pastime for kicking out the country’s prime ministers for a measly letter without thinking about the consequences of their actions on reputation and the well being of the country — reminds me of a Panch Tantra story of four Brahmin men — three of them armed with exceptional powers and their fourth illiterate brother with no power except – Commons Sense.

    While traveling through the jungles of Brindaban the Bramin brothers stumbled upon an intact tiger skeleton.
    The three brothers became very excited — let’s test our powers on this skeleton — well I can put flesh on this skeleton said the eldest one — I can put the skin over the flesh said the second one — the third Brahmin said I can make it alive!

    The illiterate youngest brother got real alarmed — tried to dissuade his brothers from this hazardous experiment — but to no avail — then he asked them can you hold for a few minutes till I climb the nearest tree — the three brothers agreed.

    The youngest bumpkin climbed the tree — his three scientist brothers revived the tiger — the tiger got up — thanked the three profusely and then said — I am sorry to do this to you gentlemen — but I have to eat you guys if you don’t mind — because I am very hungry — haven’t eaten for a long time. Hope you will forgive me for that.

    Moral of the story: Power alone is not enough if not applied with common sense — it actually could hurt instead of bringing benefits.

    • Muhammad says:

      Who are you applying this power to – the SC or the government. If you are applying this power to the SC in this case, I disagree with you. Your story is interesting, but not applicable.

    • Kabir says:

      I agree with these remarks which would be somewhat harsh to judiciary loving people like me in Pakistan. This government has done so much bad to to the governance that an independent judiciary was required to provide the relief to the people but at the same time court has to exercise restraint instead of following its ego. Why the CJ keeps these two judges with him in the bench No.1? has it become a cottery that has to put the govt on mat every time? What is moral of the of the whole thing? A very smaller group has the constitutional right to strike down the constitutional act of a far bigger group. The bigger group (Parliamentarians) is directly elected by the people while the smaller group (judges) is selected by the bigger group. Its complilcate very complicate……..

      • NASAH (USA) says:

        Show mw a Pakistani governmwnt either military or civilian that did not do “bad” to the people — by this time you guys should have gotten used to government doing ‘bad’ to you guys — but looks like you just woke up to find a bad government after 64 years of living in the paradise of goood governance.

        What innocence!

  13. NASAH (USA) says:

    The judges are playing their little game of snake and ladder ludo with the the prime ministership of the country — without thinking about its consequences for the country.

  14. mohsin says:

    I think the judiciary of Pakistan is exceeding its limits.Since the political forces in Pakistan are not united and the military is in the background the supreme court who has mostly like minded judges decided to fill this vacuum by their own bias judgments and to keep the political government non functional.This trend is more worse than Zia’s hungriness to keep everything within himself.The misery of Pakistan is non ending.

  15. Amjad Wyne says:

    The judges are overstepping their responsibility just as the government and the parliament are moving ever closer to downright criminal behavior. If judges were hrting the cause of democracy, the government and the parliament (as well as the opposition) were not really helping it either. And if this is what Dawn considers democracy then may God help you all.

  16. Laeeq, NY says:

    At present time dictatorial rule of supreme court should be accepted by all means as our executive branch is manipulating the constitution and amending it for their own convenience . As long as decisions of the courts are not above the law of the lands, their decisions should be respected by all means and they deserve the solidarity of the whole nation. If we let this supreme court fall through our corrupt “Hukmarans”, then there is nothing left to save this country.

  17. mfm says:

    pro: zardari type corrupt leaders will find it harder to get away with corrupt practices – which is very important in developing countries such as Pakistan.
    con: dangerous move since it makes the judiciary seem to be above the law… instead of the military elites or political elites we now have a new class of judicial elites emerging who may want to have a share in the pie of profits from rent seeking.

  18. Hassan Parvez says:

    Great day for, democracy in Pakistan. The civilian government of Zardari was acting as “Dictatorship” government when it passed the contempt of court law.
    Thank you judges of Supreme Court of Pakistan.

    • Asad Ali Kasuri says:

      Who allowed the SC to be what it is? The Army? Nawaz Sharif? It was the PPP that put the Court in the front, but the SC is abusing its authority.

      Why has the CJ not resigned? his son was billing millions of rupees from his house. That should be reason enough to cast a shadow of corruption.

  19. Capt Mansur says:

    Citizens like us really do not know what is happening, is this good or bad for country?
    Becuase pakistan is famous for Hire a Judge if you are in court . This same Chief Justice STOPPED investigation against his Son for accepting Graft.
    We read that all are CORRUPT,i.e Politicans, Judges, Bureaucrats, even Army Generals, who to trust we do not know?
    Only point that goes in favour of Army is that they Managed atomic bomb and have laid down there lives.

    • Muhammad says:

      Mansur, I have to say that your comments show your own ignorance. You need to know more. The SC is supreme and makes the final decision, which must be accepted and obeyed by all, period.

      • Ali Raza Gillani says:

        But what SC is doing is trying to be the new Judicial martial law. SC should not overstep her boundries.

  20. Agha Ata says:

    To use the word “dictatorship” for the authority of an Apex court is an insult. To incite the readers by hinting and leading them to believe a probable wrong is not good journalism. One could do the same thing to a King and get severely punished. In order to make such accusations one should watch for several years to see the result of the court decisions., and then . . . feel what people say, before you can accuse the court. But to give a comment on something that happened last Thursday is a very immature decision. It seems to be a vary dangerous trend for the entire nation. When everybody can criticize and advice even the Chief Justice..

    • Ali Raza Gillani says:

      Chief Justice should watch his steps. He is abusing his authority. He should not be biased yet he is and doing all in his power to destroy PPP and forgiving/ignoring others.

  21. Riz says:

    I think right now Supreme Court is the only institution which is trying its best to restore peace as well as tackle any unconstituitional step being taken by government just to keep its office and provide more immunity to the corrupt office holders. I mean look how things work in Pakistan and the whole world would be laughing on us that to save one person a new law is being passed by the assemblies and the same person is signing it to be implemented. What could be the height of stupidity other than this step…
    If an institution like Supreme Court is standing between the whole nation and these corrupt people and their juggling acts then this institution must not be called as JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP.
    Right now no other department including Assemblies or any higher government office is doing anything good for Pakistan except Supreme Court.
    CJ and co. please keep up the good work and let Pakistan lead out of this deadly illness in the form of corruption and corrupt government.

Dawn.com on Facebook


dawn.com on Facebook

Advertisement