The Ugly Face of Fascism
On Friday Nov 28, 1997 the Supreme Court of Pakistan Building was attacked by an unruly mob that broke through the restraining police cordon. According to reports the mob was chanting slogans and epithets against the Chief Justice (CJ) and almost reached the door of the Courtroom where he was presiding over a Contempt of Case hearing against the PM, Mian Nawaz Sharif. Inside the Courtroom the protest by the PM’s lawyers was civilized and couched in legal language, lawyers cited the decisions of the Quetta and Peshawar Benches of the Supreme Court (SC) in holding the CJ’s appointment as illegal and requested the CJ to step down till the matter was decided by a Bench comprising all Judges of the SC less the CJ.
Nobody of sane mind will condone such an incident as happened in the SC on Friday. Any courtroom in any civilized society must be treated with dignity, honour and respect, it is neutral ground whose decorum must be maintained. We can never allow street power to coerce the norms of justice, allowing street power into the vicinity of the courtroom spells doom for any civilized society. Judges are human beings and as such will react as all human beings to intimidation, whether it comes in sophisticated form or in crude fashion. However, the issue is not whether they are scared or not, the issue revolves around the sanctity of the courtroom. While protest is an acceptable part of the political process, entering Court premises in violent fashion in an uncontrolled manner is almost unheard of and violates the sanctity of the Court. What we are talking about is not a normal courtroom but of the SC itself which is the paramount place of justice in the country. The incident on Friday smacks of Fascism, closely resembling the outrages through which courts of law and judges were subjugated by Hitler in the early 30s. The storming of the SC is an unacceptable incident, one is aghast as to the display of crude street power. Is this the future for our children, that we should influence the course of justice by forcible means of mob force? If we cannot differentiate between the rough justice delivered by a mob or vigilantes and that flowing from logic and norms of society descended from a constitution, then we are doomed. We decry martial law because it envisages swift, abridged justice that does not give enough right and time for defence to the accused as available in normal courts, yet what is the force that drove this mob to break into the very symbol of justice in Pakistan and try to impose their collective will on the Supreme Court? One is ashamed that elements in the PML stooped so low as to use such bully-boy tactics. In the history of Pakistan this must be one of our blackest days, a day of infamy and regret.
The Parameters of Fairplay
Requiring the Chief Executive of any Government to appear in person in any court of law is unprecedented, not only in Pakistan. Even in the United States, President Clinton has been fighting to avoid fighting court cases while he is President, what to talk of appearing in person. There must be some legal protection for Chief Executives of Government and other important functionaries otherwise they can be kept in Court by anyone for any length of time, what this will do for governance needs no elucidation.
The PM had three options, viz (1) to apologize before the Court unconditionally (2) go half way i.e. without expressly admitting any guilt express regrets for any remarks which may have upset the judiciary or (3) fight out the case on merit. Given the circumstances and the composition of the Court (and mood thereof), he risked being sentenced on any one of the options and thus being put on course for disqualification as PM. With such an eventuality a foregone conclusion, there were many suggestions from different quarters, ranging from one extreme to the other. One must refer to Fuller as far back as 1732, to quote “natural folly is bad enough but learned folly is intolerable”. Suffice to say, many ambitious souls are looking forward to Mian Sahib coming to grief, this is an excellent opportunity to differentiate friend from foe.
Dissolution Again?
Towards the end of the Supreme Court hearings that led to the historic verdict of May 26, the Empire showed its hand regarding future course of action by coordinating a media offensive by the CMs of the Provinces against the PM. The Provinces followed this up by requesting the Honourable Supreme Court that they be allowed to become party to the petition being heard by the Provinces. At the fag end of the arguments, the Supreme Court allowed them to make their brief submissions against giving the Petitioner any relief but were obviously not impressed enough to affect its verdict. Having lost the Courtroom battle, the Empire shifted its battle lines to the Provinces, as events are unfolding, with consequences far more dangerous. If one were to do serious war gaming, the scenario would unfold like this, the dissolution of the PAs (and the on/off restoration process thereof) would be followed by the NA Budget Session. Forced to impose certain direct taxes in the Budget to meet the officially projected Rs 85 billion deficit (more in the region of Rs 110 billion) the Federal Government would face stiff opposition within the Assembly and this would flow into the streets. The Provincial Governments would stand back and let anarchy take hold. If the Federal Government used Rangers they would yell blue murder and civil war conditions would be created. The Army would have to be called in to restore order, the situation would then be ripe where the President would be satisfied that conditions are such that the Federal Government could no longer perform its duties and an Emergency would be declared, the jurisdiction of the judiciary with respect to fundamental rights would be suspended. The NA having passed the Budget, it would have done the same job a Queen does for any Empire, having produced a male heir it would have no further use for the Empire and would be dissolved again. All this may sound far fetched but given the legal and political footwork witnessed in the last two weeks, particularly in the Punjab, this is very much within the realm of a distinct possibility, desperate men never fear any consequences for society at large and nations in particular.
As much as the PM is to be commended for extending an olive branch to the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, he failed in a crucial test of political sagacity, he should have also made moves to pacify the President. Given that Ghulam Ishaq Khan may not have reciprocated to any of his overtures, why work on the assumption that he would not? Whatever may be the political differences of the PM with the President, as long as he is the President he represents the unity of the Federation and he must be given due deference as becomes his position. One may not like him, that is no reason to show disrespect by eliminating the crucial and necessary dialogue between State and Government that is the essence of smooth governance. Political requirements may require that the Constitution be suitably amended to balance the powers equitably, that does not obviate respect for the Office that is the highest in the land according to the Constitution. Politics enjoins the art of compromise, the PM has far less differences with the President than Ms Bhutto has, even given their present cosy relationship. By not opening up communication channels to the old man on the hill, the PM has closed down an option that is very much available to the Leader of the Opposition to exploit to the PM’s detriment. It also gives an opportunity for self-seekers around the President to evolve a hard stance against the PM. These people will not allow this old man to rest in his twilight years. In defeat, Nawaz Sharif showed admirable defiance, in victory he must show extraordinary magnanimity. At the moment the President is in a corner fighting for his political life and he is fighting back in the ways he knows how to, unfortunately the no-holds barred stance on either side is seriously damaging the political and economic fabric of the Federation. Muslim tradition dictates that if an enemy lands up at your doorstep you cannot deny him succour or hospitality, for the sake of this country Nawaz Sharif must swallow his pride and land up at the Presidential doorstep. How can we know whether the old man on the hill really believes that forgiveness is divine unless this precept is really tested. The PM has people like Elahi Baksh Soomro, Sartaj Aziz, Malik Majid, etc with access to the President, to act as initiators and moderators of any dialogue. Why does he not use them?