CSS Forums - View Single Post

shallowwater · #15 Wednesday, May 06, 2009

1. Buffeted by crises.

AS things stand, Pakistan finds itself buffeted by multiple crises. The raging militancy, the constant pressure of the Americans to go for the military option to deal with it and India's machinations trying to unnerve Pakistan, are some of the serious challenges it faces in the security and political spheres. Not a day passes without any of these threatening factors creating more problems for it. On Tuesday morning, a suicide bomber rammed his car into a vehicle carrying security personnel just on the outskirts of NWFP's capital, Peshawar, signalling once again that not even principal towns are immune from the terrorists' designs. Four security men were killed and eight wounded; and the brutal act did not spare the innocent school children, who were passing by at the time, with several of them injured. After the Buner operation that has taken a heavy toll of life, the Swat peace deal seems to be all but dead, with clashes between the security forces and the militants already taking place in some parts of the valley.
Following President Barack Obama's scathing criticism of Pakistan's civilian government, there has been a stream of statements and analyses throwing up hosts of scenarios, some as scary as foreboding its disintegration. On a daily basis, the vicious circle of pressure goes on, as Admiral Mullen is again in the news expressing the US wish for a military operation on the fast track. While President Obama counsels us not to regard India "as a mortal threat" and shift our focus to the challenge of militancy on the western borders with a single-minded devotion, New Delhi, ever scheming to fish in troubled waters, starts holding military exercises on our borders. No strategist worth its salt would forget the lifelong hostility between the two countries on the basis of baseless assumptions. The facts on the ground speak louder and clearer. It is a pity that the leader of the superpower cedes to the Indian pressure and modifies his stance on the centrality of Kashmir in forging peace between the two countries, but there is little justification for Pakistan to overlook how the Indians conduct themselves. India and Pakistan have fought wars and continue to have serious disputes. Not only that. New Delhi creates new realities meant to make matters worse for Islamabad. The diversion of water by constructing dams in the upper reaches against the explicit provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty is extremely worrisome to Pakistan and serves as a constant reminder of India's hostility. It has been termed as a more serious threat than the Taliban. Should not Washington be reviewing its strategy towards the Subcontinent in recognition of these threats to Pakistan and spare some effort to persuade India to shed its intransigence and sort out the contentious issues? That would constitute quite a setback to militancy.

2. A new dimension.

THE Chief Justice's announcement, while hearing a case in the Supreme Court, that the latter could review the 17th Amendment, adds a new dimension to the constitutional debate in the country. After the War on Terror, the question of what to do with this much hated amendment to the Constitution is the focus of everybody's attention in national politics. The recent advances of the Taliban have put this debate on the backburner for a while, but it is still simmering and waiting for a response. All wrongs, advocates of democracy will say, are not righted merely with the resignation of the previous President and the reinstatement of the apex judiciary.
As far as the former dictator is concerned, what more could have been done other than his resignation? Well, in the Chief Justice's own words, "We can review all martial law regulations and actions, even those given protection by Article 270AA of the Constitution under the 17th Constitutional Amendment." That is bound to be interesting, if ugly. The whole deal is going to be challenged, however. The judiciary cannot make laws, only interpret them, the defenders of the former President are going to say. True, but the judiciary can, even if there is a law or amendment passed by Parliament, rule that it is still ultra vires of the Constitution. Open to interpretation, yes, but we already know the mood of the court when this debate would come up. And to be fair, the apex court really would be well within its rights to review the Amendment. This statement by the Chief Justice could also spur up the Treasury to prepare its much hyped constitutional package. Initially meant primarily for solving the problem of the judiciary deposed on 3 November 2007, the PPP's constitutional package will now deal principally with the mess left by Pervez Musharraf in the form of the 17th Amendment. This includes a host of issues, including the powers of the President, the two-time term limit for Prime Ministers (previously a cause for concern for both the PPP and PML (N), now only for the latter) and others. The Supreme Court, however, can contribute a lot towards the resolution of the problem of militancy in the country. The new National Judicial Policy has set a couple of standards that has a time cap of 90 days on criminal and family cases and 30 days for child custody cases. If civil cases were also to be sped up, the demand for alternative systems of justice, often confused with simple extremist militancy, would go away and the militants be sidelined to some extent, as far as public support is concerned. Problems like these are becoming more of an existential threat than the ones that have cropped up because of the 17th Amendment.

3. Lawyers' strike.

LAWYERS are preparing to organize a strike on May 12 to commemorate the killing on that date of lawyers trying to welcome Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry who was due to address the Karachi Bar that day, during his era of deposition. In Karachi there is to be a complete shutterdown strike, and the MQM has joined the preparations for it, even though it was suspected in the original killings. On the other hand, the MQM has claimed those killed as martyrs for the party, The MQM Rabita Committee has joined the strike on the asking of the Haq Parast Aman Jirga, which pointed out that the party said it had lost 16 workers in the tragic events of that date. This was disclosed by MQM Rabita Committee member Waseem Aftab, who told this paper that while the MQM had not issued the call for a strike, it backed the current call.
The MQM's support for the strike has been qualified by Mr Aftab, who said that the party had come under immense pressure "not to bow down to those who want to destroy peace in the provincial capital." He said this was a conspiracy, about which MQM chief Altaf Hussain would disclose the facts on May 12. He has also said that the strike would be peaceful, with certain types of emergency services continuing. The strike is also to be joined by the ANP. Though the ANP does not have the same level of influence in Karachi as the MQM, the real significance of this is that the MQM and the ANP are both joining the strike, despite being junior partners of the PPP in the Central government, as well as the Sindh government. This is an indication of the widespread public support for the strike, and for the cause, which it represents.
Lawyers belong to all parties, and thus their causes do too. This was forgotten in the lawyers' struggle to restore the deposed judges, to the cost of those parties, which opposed the lawyers. Yet, amidst the parties' efforts to make amends, no party should be allowed to become part of a movement it does not believe in, any way.