Pakistan: Do not tarnish the dignity of the judiciary

Six weeks have passed since the dissolution of the Provincial Assemblies of Punjab and Khyber Province. It is a constitutional requirement that elections should be held within ninety days of the dissolution of the Assemblies. No final date has been revealed, the federal government and its representative governors in the provinces are constantly evasive in this regard. But instead of following this order, the Election Commission and the Governor filed an appeal in the High Court which is pending.

?Meanwhile, the President of the State, considering his constitutional responsibility, wrote three letters to the Election Commission for consultation, but the Election Commission at first did not respond to the letter and then clearly refused to consult the President of the State in this regard, on which the President itself elected by the two provincial assemblies keeping in mind the constitutional requirement of ninety days date has been announced to be held on April 9, 2023. At the same time, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court proposed to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to take notice of the elections, while earlier the petitions of the speakers of the two provincial assemblies had also reached the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. In view of these circumstances, the Chief Justice, taking personal notice of the matter, constituted a nine-member bench of the Supreme Court to ensure the elections to both the provincial assemblies within the ninety-day period stipulated in the Constitution The way of violation could be stopped, but luckily, at the very beginning of this bench, efforts to make the bench controversial and hijack the matter came to light. On Thursday, when the hearing of the suo motu case started, Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial explained that according to Article 224 of the Constitution, it is mandatory to hold elections within ninety days; the court will not tolerate violation of the Constitution in any way. , time is passing fast, while on the other hand, since the matter was pending in the High Court and no decision could be taken on it. At the very beginning of the hearing, Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel expressed his reservations over the taking of notice by the Chief Justice. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah opined that the court also has to see that the term of the assemblies is five years in the constitution and the people elected their representatives for five years in the last general elections and sent them to the assemblies. It is to be seen whether the Chief Minister dissolved the assembly while remaining within the constitution or dissolved it at the behest of a political figure. It is possible that after reviewing the records, the court came to the conclusion that the assembly was dissolved wrongly and the decision to restore the assembly caused the crisis itself. Let it end. Justice Athar Manullah also raised the question whether the Chief Minister can dissolve the Assembly at the behest of a leader. During the hearing on the first day, Attorney General and Tehreek-e-Insaaf lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar also presented some points before the court, however, the Chief Justice clarified that the time is very short and the court has to hear three cases while the bench member judges. The questions raised by the gentlemen will also be included in the court order. On Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the President, the two governors, the parties of the ruling coalition PDM and the Election Commission, and the proceedings were postponed until the next day.

On the other hand, outside the court, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and some members of his cabinet expressed their concerns on the notice bench, while Maryam Nawaz, senior vice president and chief organizer of Nawaz League, called the judges by name in the public meeting. They made a target for criticism. They keep making all kinds of accusations openly without any strings attached. It is an old practice of the ruling Nawaz League that they have been making target criticism to put pressure on the judiciary and other institutions. After retiring from the Prime Ministership in 2017, Mian Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz continued to criticize the five judges.

Earlier, the Nawaz League also has the unique honor of attacking the highest court of the country, although the tape of the conversation between Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the then Justice Malik Muhammad Qayyum was released by the leader of the People's Party late Rehman Malik. In which he was instructing Malik Qayyum to give the harshest punishment to Benazir Bhutto, in response, Justice Qayyum was assuring the compliance order, after the disclosure of this tape, Malik Qayyum resigned from the High Court. But Shahbaz Sharif has assumed the position of the country's prime minister while remaining safe from all kinds of accountability till date. In this way, it is an old tradition of Nawaz League to criticize the courts and use them for their own purposes, but this time there has been a sad development in this regard that the division among the members of the Supreme Court bench is also coming to the fore. While the Pakistan Bar Council has also expressed no confidence in the bench of the Supreme Court.

The Bar Council's statement said that Justice Faiz Isa and Justice Tariq Masood, the most senior judges of the court, were not included in the bench. A lawyer has filed a reference against Justice Naqvi in the Supreme Judicial Council, while the Pakistan Bar Council has also indicated to file a reference against Justice Mazahir Naqvi. The Nawaz League has already been very active in this regard, now the People's Party and other parties in the government coalition are also appearing to be following the same path and the most regrettable thing is that the chaos in the ranks of the Supreme Judiciary itself and mutual dissensions are emerging while the mutual division and grouping of the members of the Bar is also prominent.

The painful fact is that all the important and constitutional institutions of the country have become controversial at this time, even though the judiciary has never been safe from it, but just as this honorable institution is being flouted in the general public at this time, in the past it an example is hardly found. Our politicians, constitutional and legal experts and judges associated with the higher judiciary should take it seriously and think with a cold heart and mind that they are pushing the country and the nation into the quagmire. The supreme judiciary of the country has been the center of hopes of the people until now ?don't destroy its honor and dignity.?