A Letter from Prometheus
Last evening one of my schoolfellows who teaches at a European university called me and he was almost shouting at me while telling people who were running the state affairs in Pakistan are jokers. I had to remind him that “I am neither a responsible government official nor a politician so please do not shout at me. I am a simple powerless writer and whatever I consider harming my country I pen it with full honesty and fearlessly, this is the maximum I can contribute.” I advised him to read my latest book How Does Superclass rule the Nations? —A Case Study from Pakistan before shouting at me.
He was angry over what was going on inside and outside the Supreme Court of Pakistan. I told him that everybody who loves this country is annoyed over this situation but nobody has the power to stop them who are staging this comedy theatre. The sum total of our discussion was that confused political leadership, self-interests gaining models of Governance, Elitism, Feudalism, Cronyism, and lack of boldness to demand civil rights by the public have resulted in what we are facing today.
I do not remember any series of protests by the public in Pakistan demanding their civil rights or against the delay of legal cases in courts but you can find thousands of news items in the last three decades where people had been burning public vehicles over something that happened somewhere in Europe or North America. My friend is right in stating that the majority of people in decision-making positions are simply Jokers! Who cares about Pakistan?
My friend was of the view that right now Pakistan is a laughing stock for the situation where the higher judiciary is taking all powers that fall into the realm of the executive and the Parliament. I told my friend that politicians, media, law practitioners, and even judges of the Supreme Court and members of Bar Councils are worried about the situation and are raising a series of questions but there is nobody to listen to these concerns.
There is no doubt since long the judiciary has been taking over the State’s functions and politicians had been sitting as scary ducks. One prime minister was hanged in one of the most controversial legal case,s including one popularly known as the Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto case, two prime ministers were sent to their homes as “punished and disqualified”. Do we want to continue giving unlimited and unchecked powers to our judges? I believe this time the Supreme Court looks in the mood to send the entire federal cabinet or at least another prime minister home as disqualified and punished because the Parliament is trying to be bold and the current law by Parliament is an attempt to reduce the misuse of power by any individual. Parliament is not asking to take any powers away from the judiciary, rather it is only saying that instead of one person deciding critical matters, it should be combined wisdom. So, where is any attempt to interfere in judicial powers as claimed by the CJP?
The unfortunate divide in the Supreme Court is of course not in favour of the country but it has given a chance to the public to raise some sensitive questions that it was not allowed to raise in Pakistan. Such questions include:
Who takes an average of more than 20 years to decide a case and still has no regrets?
Who have accumulated hundreds of thousands of pending cases in the judicial system and have no concern to give timely justice which is their primary job?
Who has failed to develop any effective system to decide business and economic cases –a significant contributor to our economic collapse today?
Who is failing to improve the court infrastructure and systems and is still using the infrastructure and systems mostly left by colonial masters over 75 years ago?
Who commits the highest level of conflict of interest by refusing to be accountable to anyone except their own selves, which is no accountability?
Who has consistently proven to decide cases based on the sides which suited them in the last 75 years?
Who has failed to ensure rule of law due to their changing interpretations of the law?
This is the moment in Pakistan’s history where parliamentarians can change things for the better by reducing the powers of individuals and giving them the combined wisdom of a few. And if parliamentarians do not make the right decision today and continue giving any institution unlimited powers, then Parliament will continue to suffer and there is fear that it would dissolve like salt in the gushing waters of history.
The issue of “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied” has been an important point of discussion among law practitioners and academia but the Constitution of Pakistan protects the conduct of the judiciary and states that criticizing the judiciary is unlawful. This is one of the reasons that debating the rule of the judiciary is discouraged in Pakistan, resulting in almost no accountability of the judiciary. This is one of the reasons that critical work on this issue is being produced mostly outside of Pakistan by Pakistani academicians living abroad and by foreign writers.
The Myth of Justice in Pakistan, authored by Dr Muhammad Bilal who has his LlM and PhD. degrees in Law from the UK indicates that justice in Pakistan has become a myth and an unachievable goal. He believes that there are several reasons for delayed justice including complex procedures, old and ineffective laws, the attitude of judges and lawyers, and the backlog of pending cases in the superior as well as lower judiciary of Pakistan.
Another academic paper that is written by Hafiz Muhammad Ihsan Zafeer of Shaanxi Normal University China, published in November 2020, titled “Delaying Factors Regarding Civil Justice in Pakistan (Lower Courts)” indicates that because of procedural as well as practical loopholes and existing defective administration of Justice, our Judiciary is not proficient enough in delivering Justice. Because of this, people lost their trust in the Judiciary, and such a situation creates social disorganization.
Dr Bilal is more straight and critical and in his research, he claims that the research of “F.S.Khan,” Pakistani courts require the continuous visits of the suit’s parties, and normally for the decision of any conflict a defendant makes 72 visits to the courts, and a decision of a case costs nearly Rs 0.2 to 0.3 million to such a party. Continuous visits to courts not only cause a financial crisis but can also have a psychological impact on the suit’s parties. Dr Bilal also claims that judges are the backbone of the judiciary and in Pakistan, they have no professional attitude and perform their function only for salary but not for justice (Sherwani, 2006).
This is the first time that the military establishment is categorically clear on supporting the Parliament and the parliamentary system though it had been trying its best to roll back the parliamentary system in the country and introduce the Presidential form of government. The military leadership cannot be as supportive of the parliamentary system as it is today and this is a historic moment in the hands of politicians.
On April 14, COAS Gen Syed Asim Munir, while addressing the parliamentarians during an in-camera briefing on the national security situation in the National Assembly, asked the nation to give up the debate of “Naya” and “Purana” and instead talk about “our Pakistan”. A number of politicians who attended the session claim that COAS was very clear about what he was talking about and he also stated that the elected representatives of the people should determine the country’s destination, and the Army would fully support them in the journey to development and success. He was of the view that people exercise their right to express an opinion through the Constitution and Parliament, while absolute sovereignty belongs to Almighty Allah. He was of the view that the Constitution states that the power will be exercised by the elected representatives of the people.
In one of my articles I mentioned that this is the moment in Pakistan’s history where parliamentarians can change things for the better by reducing the powers of individuals and giving them the combined wisdom of a few. And if parliamentarians do not make the right decision today and continue giving any institution unlimited powers, then Parliament will continue to suffer and there is fear that it would dissolve like salt in the gushing waters of history.
