To what extent is the Supreme Court acting Neutral?
Saturday, February 11th, 2012 2:46:28 by Syed Hassan Bokhari
To what extent is the Supreme Court acting Neutral?
Looking at the overall issue of the contempt of court being handed down to Prime Minister of Pakistan Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani, one might think that it was bound to happen as the federal government failed to act on the orders of the Supreme Court for over
two years, but while closely looking at it, does there seem to be any neutrality in the case?
When an issue is ordered by the court and the judgement is not followed, a contempt of court is enforced right then and there, but what we see is that after years of the verdict, the situation has suddenly led into the Prime Minister being called in and
without further a due, conviction has taken place of the chief executive.
Could the Prime Minister’s statements against the chief of army staff and director general ISI be the cause that led to the action taken in haste by the Supreme Court?
When Prime Minister Gillani issued statements against the two institutional heads, the surprising part was when the Supreme Court took notice and directed the court to submit, in writing, that they would not remove either COAS Ashfaq Pervez Kyani or Shuja
Pasha.
A student of constitutional law could easily tell that such jurisdiction is certainly not in the powers of the judiciary on directing the executive not to remove a subordinate without a significant reason, which in this case, the Supreme Court did not give.
Could prosecution against the country’s very own sitting Prime Minister be something that has been planned and executed behind closed doors with mutual cooperation, between the army and judiciary? Could it be a way to get back at Gillani for what he said
instead of doing it directly through a martial law?
What we, the people have to remember is that Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is also a PCO judge and allowed martial law to come into affect along with legalising it. If the courts duty is to interpret the constitution and defend it, has he not
broken it himself back in 2002?
Iftikhar Chaudhry was brought in after Pervez Musharraf dissolved the former judiciary and reinstated after he sacked them all again in 2007, but what about the people that were sacked before he himself became Chief Justice in 2002? Should they not have
been reinstated and be allowed to complete their terms?
As it is clear that the army would not like to tarnish its image any further through direct imposition of martial, it seems as if they have strengthened their back door policy of influencing the elected representatives of the people and other arms of the
government.
Shouting foul at every corner, especially in a fabricated case like the memo gate, whose creator has shaken this country so violently that instead of coming here, the judges are willing to put their dignity on the line by accepting each and every demand
of his.
What has kept Pakistan from prospering is not only the ever so vulnerable political scene but also those institutions which consider themselves to be above the law and insubordinate to the elected representatives of the people.
Tags: Contempt, Prime Minister, Supreme Court, Yousaf Raza Gillani
Short URL: https://www.newspakistan.pk/?p=12431
Posted by 
