tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12219873.post2761543334905568542..comments2024-03-26T03:03:42.414-07:00Comments on The Glasshouse: Punjab in the spotlightA Different Drumhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01350929185765118924noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12219873.post-34818631778561531622011-04-13T18:28:39.515-07:002011-04-13T18:28:39.515-07:00This makes the business worthwhile while further a...This makes the business worthwhile while further adding to the rising popularity of wholesale <a href="www.webnewstore.org/" rel="nofollow"><strong>Replica Watch Store</strong></a> . First and foremost, there are the manufacturers of the duplicate timepieces; and in this sector also there are several grades.slw1111https://www.blogger.com/profile/06808655119752250462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12219873.post-70887215158127827022007-05-05T04:07:00.000-07:002007-05-05T04:07:00.000-07:00Pak Army's electoral comes from Panjab. This is th...Pak Army's electoral comes from Panjab. This is theirs recruiting ground. How can they bite the hands that feed them, and vice versa.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12219873.post-26639962545773194962007-05-04T23:11:00.000-07:002007-05-04T23:11:00.000-07:00Punjab’s curse of appeasement Legal eyeBy Babar Sa...Punjab’s curse of appeasement <BR/>Legal eye<BR/><BR/>By Babar Sattar<BR/><BR/>Fifteen justices of the Sindh High Court congregated in Sukkur recently to hear Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary speak and to express solidarity with the cause of judicial independence. In Peshawar the Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court along with nine other serving justices and many retired justices welcomed the CJ. The unanimous position taken by the superior judiciary of Sindh and NWFP is an extremely powerful statement in favour of the principle of judicial independence and against Musharraf regime’s treatment of the CJ, for it reflects the shared agony of the vanguards of our constitution on how the elementary principles of our fundamental law are being mutilated.<BR/><BR/>The CJ is now scheduled to visit Lahore and the position taken by justices of the Lahore High Court will determine whether the legal fraternity’s movement for judicial independence is unanimous countrywide or if Punjab continues to suffer the curse of appeasement. The response of the Punjabi judiciary generates anxiety for various reasons. As a matter of historical record members of the Punjabi judiciary are blamed for complicity in authoring the doctrine of necessity, for exhibiting the disturbing propensity to appease rulers of the day and succumbing to the diktat of expediency. For example after General Musharraf’s coup of 1999 four judges from Sindh refused to swear oath to the Provisional Constitutional Order, but the judges from Punjab -- except the lone Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Khan -- had no qualms about legitimising the military dictatorship.<BR/><BR/>Further, it is now public knowledge that the chief justice of Lahore High Court is at daggers drawn with the chief justice of Pakistan. Consequently a civil judge who dared to attend the CJ’s talk at the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi bench building was suspended for her audacity to take a public position in support of the CJ. Further, judges in Punjab are under instruction from the Lahore High Court to dismiss cases for non-prosecution on the days when lawyers are on strike. Thus, critics might say that the Lahore High Court under the stewardship of its chief has not taken a non-partisan position vis-à-vis the judicial crisis, which makes one wonder how his influence will bear upon the posturing of Lahore High Court justices during the CJ’s visit to Lahore. <BR/><BR/>The argument that members of the superior judiciary should not take a position on the issue of suspension of the chief justice is disingenuous. The weaker counter-argument is that all institutions show solidarity toward their members: generals protect their officers and bureaucrats support their colleagues, so why should judges remain neutral in face of an intrigue to throw out their head? The stronger argument however is that the fight of the legal fraternity and the civil society is not just for the rights of one individual. Whether or not one likes the CJ is immaterial at the moment. All humans are imperfect and even when they wear judicial robes their judgment is not infallible. <BR/><BR/>Despite the absence of charges of financial or judicial impropriety against the CJ, it is easy to misdirect the focus of the debate by concentrating on his idiosyncrasies or limitations as an individual. The bottom line is that acquiescing in the treatment meted out to the CJ by the Musharraf regime will do serious harm to the rule of law and independence of judiciary in Pakistan. It is not that the CJ is indispensable as an individual, but upholding the values and principles that he stands for today is absolutely essential for the health of our nation and polity and that is why the stakes of citizens in this judicial crisis are so high. There is no room for silence or apathy in this debate, for indifference or neutrality amounts to support for the Musharraf regime.<BR/><BR/>Propriety demands that justices of the Lahore High Court receive the CJ when he visits Lahore, for he is still the chief justice of Pakistan. By not extending him the courtesy due to a chief justice they will only reinforce the cynical view that once the powers-that-be pronounce the fate of an individual, it is carved in stone and cannot be undone -- a view that leaves no room for the rule of law and reduces constitutionalism to a mere formality. <BR/><BR/>More importantly it is inexcusable silence that explains Pakistan’s lop-sided institutional development in a historical context. The civil-military imbalance -- the bane of our democracy -- is the product of the military’s encroachment over the authority and jurisdiction of civilian institutions. However, such encroachment could not have been so comprehensive and effective had these institutions, including the judiciary, not voluntarily surrendered their will to exercise legitimate authority over their constitutional jurisdiction. It is thus crucial for the judiciary at this crucial juncture to stand up and fight to uphold the constitution and for its exclusive right to interpret the constitution independently. <BR/><BR/>The question that many raise is this: why is Punjab always more likely to falter when there is need to take a stand on matters of principle? Is expediency a compulsion of power and given that Punjab has a larger share of such power necessarily makes the politics of Punjabis self-serving? Is there something about our sociological make-up that explains our historical aversion to resist tyranny and bow to the whims of force? But then in the present context how do you explain the unflinching position of Punjabi lawyers or actions of Justice Jawad Khawaja -- the only member of Pakistan’s superior judiciary to have resigned his office to protest the actions of the Musharraf regime?<BR/><BR/>We suffer from an inexplicable urge to appease those in positions of authority. What is it that the Musharraf regime can do to persecute justices who refuse to acquiesce and take silent positions to demonstrate their support for the CJ? Can the general move presidential references against all such judges to steal their robes? Why do justices, who agonise over the assault on the independence of judiciary, feel hapless against taking a position in accordance with their conscience? Did calamity befall justices of Sindh and NWFP who silently demonstrated their support for the CJ by their presence while also not violating their judicial code of conduct? Is fear of reprisal not overstated?<BR/><BR/>If a majority of the Punjabi justices decide to grace the CJ’s talk in Lahore with their presence, the support of the entire legal fraternity (the bench and the bar) to the cause of judicial independence will be complete and unequivocal. Such unanimity will send an even louder message to the Musharraf regime and the nation that the general’s transgression of constitutional authority in dealing with the CJ is beyond doubt. If despite constitutional guarantees regarding security of tenure and other protections our judges find themselves incapable of taking positions guided by their conscience and convictions, is there hope for justice in Pakistan anyway? <BR/><BR/>It is time our judges in Punjab suspend fear or considerations of favour and free themselves and the rest of us from the shackles of expediency and appeasement. <BR/><BR/>The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad. He is a Rhodes Scholar and has an LL.M from Harvard Law School. Email: sattar@post.harvard.eduAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com