Defused Judicial Crisis – The country was awash with widespread conjecturing about the escalating tussle between the parliament and the judiciary. The coalition government was spearheading the parliamentary campaign against what it termed as excessive interference of the judiciary in the executive affairs of the country. On the other hand, the apex judiciary was insistent that by delaying elections in Punjab and KP, the government was deliberately evading the constitutional provisions that are very clear in this respect. At one juncture it was rumoured that the conflict may result in the disqualification of the incumbent prime minister on contempt of court charges. There was a spate of audio leakages that was considered an attempt to deliberately inflame the already tense relations between the political elements as one audio tape allegedly reproducing the conversation of the mother-in-law of the chief justice that had obvious political undertones. The political atmosphere in the country become exceedingly toxic that also had social consequences as the polarisation increased manifold. The economic situation is already bad and no solution to this difficulty is in the air further exacerbating the environment.
The coalition political dispensation perceived the situation very dangerous and to preclude the possibility of any debilitating judicial verdict they shifted their line of offence-defence towards the parliament and politically barricaded them within its confines. To further strengthen their position Shehbaz Sharif rushed to get preventive vote of confidence as prime minister that was construed as a surprise move on his part to prepare an alternate bastion for facing the judicial onslaught. The successful vote of confidence obtained through a parliament sans opposition and this action was aimed at sending the message to the apex court that it is now up against the representative houses that was united to face any adverse verdict. This is now has become a standard practice in Pakistan to witnesses the democratic representative elements gathering together to ultimately fall back to take cover of their institution that they insist is the supreme body whose writ cannot be bypassed. They resent that the Supreme Court of Pakistan has far exceeded it constitutional mandate as it is rewriting the constitution as it interpretations in arbitrary manner aimed at destabilising the government itself.
After a month of jockeying it is now emerged that some rationality is taking hold and may increase with time. The situation in this respect in Pakistan always remains so murky that it will not be found out that which good offices played decisive part in bringing about the thaw in the prevailing hot scenario. Plenty of conjecturing has already started to do the rounds and credit for diffusing the crisis is placed on various doors but the exact identity of the interlocutors may always remain shrouded in mystery. The first sign of an impending rapprochement emerged from the apex court itself when during the hearing of election date case the chief justice commented that the SC cannot force the government to hold negotiations with the opposition. It looks now that the ice has broken and it is up to the protagonists to find a way out of this morass so that the country can embark on the path to recovery. But as has been witnessed since the last many years arranging and holding on to truce have become very tricky particularly when the rigid elements of the leading political parties that are part of the PDM-led government would try to hold on to the status quo and by doing so keep the levers of governance in their control.
A faint hope is that the newly obtained vote of confidence many embolden the PM and his coalition partners may tilt towards hammering out a deal with the corner opposition. The onus is on both sides to find a democratic solution to the impasse. While endeavouring to negotiate a solution to the crisis it is important that the coalition government should soften its stance that insists that parliament alone has the mandate to make laws and decide on elections, it should be kept in mind that no decision by the legislature should violate the Constitution. Already the 90-day constitutional limit of the caretaker governments in KP and Punjab has passed and it would not be incorrect to say that both interim administrations are operating in legal limbo. Analysts favour holding elections to both federal and provincial legislature on the same day but the government should not insist that these be held in October or November after the current administration completes its term. It should be kept in mind that there are instances of such elections held on separate dates and insistence on holding them on the same date is not the issue that may result in an impasse.
The most potent sign of a thaw emerged when the chief justice mentioned that the SC could not force the government to hold negotiations with the opposition. This was quite a significant shift from the stance taken by the SC in the same case whereby in the previous hearing the court had asked political parties to hold to hold talks on 26 April and asked them to decide the matter quickly since the 14 May date for elections was still in the field and the order was binding on all authorities. Responding to the court’s advice the speaker of the NA on demands of the lawmakers wrote the CJ asking that it is best to leave the resolution of political matters to the parliament and political parties. During the hearings the court dropped a word of caution to the politicians that it was prepared to give an order if the issues are not adequately sorted out. The insistence of the court was widely viewed to be on the arbitrary side and it was pointed out by many observers that it was not the judiciary’s job to direct the State Bank of Pakistani to release elections funds or direct the parties to parley.
Amidst the raging tug-of-war a sign of thaw emerged when the CJ stated that it was not the job of the court to force the political parties to negotiate. This was quite a significant shift from the earlier stance taken by the SC in a previous hearing whereby the court had asked the parties in the government and opposition to hold parleys by 26 April and gave a day for them to come to some terms. However, no talks were held with the government not complying with 4 April directive of the court. Judiciary has also directed the ECP to release funds but the initial date for the deadline expired without the funds being released. The government put the sanction for the funds in front of the NA that rejected it offhand. The SC also heard the plea of the defence ministry asking for the national and provincial polls to be held on the same day as it found it difficult to provide the required manpower for security. To further lay a fence around the SC whose actions the political elements thinks are aggressive, they have approved a bill curtailing the suo motu powers of the CJ though the SC has already pointed out that an anticipatory injunction would be applied to it. The Weekender
Defused judicial crisis?
Bytheweekendr
Dated
May 3, 2023
Talal Wasif Qavi talks about a perennial crisis
Defused Judicial Crisis – The country was awash with widespread conjecturing about the escalating tussle between the parliament and the judiciary. The coalition government was spearheading the parliamentary campaign against what it termed as excessive interference of the judiciary in the executive affairs of the country. On the other hand, the apex judiciary was insistent that by delaying elections in Punjab and KP, the government was deliberately evading the constitutional provisions that are very clear in this respect. At one juncture it was rumoured that the conflict may result in the disqualification of the incumbent prime minister on contempt of court charges. There was a spate of audio leakages that was considered an attempt to deliberately inflame the already tense relations between the political elements as one audio tape allegedly reproducing the conversation of the mother-in-law of the chief justice that had obvious political undertones. The political atmosphere in the country become exceedingly toxic that also had social consequences as the polarisation increased manifold. The economic situation is already bad and no solution to this difficulty is in the air further exacerbating the environment.
The coalition political dispensation perceived the situation very dangerous and to preclude the possibility of any debilitating judicial verdict they shifted their line of offence-defence towards the parliament and politically barricaded them within its confines. To further strengthen their position Shehbaz Sharif rushed to get preventive vote of confidence as prime minister that was construed as a surprise move on his part to prepare an alternate bastion for facing the judicial onslaught. The successful vote of confidence obtained through a parliament sans opposition and this action was aimed at sending the message to the apex court that it is now up against the representative houses that was united to face any adverse verdict. This is now has become a standard practice in Pakistan to witnesses the democratic representative elements gathering together to ultimately fall back to take cover of their institution that they insist is the supreme body whose writ cannot be bypassed. They resent that the Supreme Court of Pakistan has far exceeded it constitutional mandate as it is rewriting the constitution as it interpretations in arbitrary manner aimed at destabilising the government itself.
After a month of jockeying it is now emerged that some rationality is taking hold and may increase with time. The situation in this respect in Pakistan always remains so murky that it will not be found out that which good offices played decisive part in bringing about the thaw in the prevailing hot scenario. Plenty of conjecturing has already started to do the rounds and credit for diffusing the crisis is placed on various doors but the exact identity of the interlocutors may always remain shrouded in mystery. The first sign of an impending rapprochement emerged from the apex court itself when during the hearing of election date case the chief justice commented that the SC cannot force the government to hold negotiations with the opposition. It looks now that the ice has broken and it is up to the protagonists to find a way out of this morass so that the country can embark on the path to recovery. But as has been witnessed since the last many years arranging and holding on to truce have become very tricky particularly when the rigid elements of the leading political parties that are part of the PDM-led government would try to hold on to the status quo and by doing so keep the levers of governance in their control.
A faint hope is that the newly obtained vote of confidence many embolden the PM and his coalition partners may tilt towards hammering out a deal with the corner opposition. The onus is on both sides to find a democratic solution to the impasse. While endeavouring to negotiate a solution to the crisis it is important that the coalition government should soften its stance that insists that parliament alone has the mandate to make laws and decide on elections, it should be kept in mind that no decision by the legislature should violate the Constitution. Already the 90-day constitutional limit of the caretaker governments in KP and Punjab has passed and it would not be incorrect to say that both interim administrations are operating in legal limbo. Analysts favour holding elections to both federal and provincial legislature on the same day but the government should not insist that these be held in October or November after the current administration completes its term. It should be kept in mind that there are instances of such elections held on separate dates and insistence on holding them on the same date is not the issue that may result in an impasse.
The most potent sign of a thaw emerged when the chief justice mentioned that the SC could not force the government to hold negotiations with the opposition. This was quite a significant shift from the stance taken by the SC in the same case whereby in the previous hearing the court had asked political parties to hold to hold talks on 26 April and asked them to decide the matter quickly since the 14 May date for elections was still in the field and the order was binding on all authorities. Responding to the court’s advice the speaker of the NA on demands of the lawmakers wrote the CJ asking that it is best to leave the resolution of political matters to the parliament and political parties. During the hearings the court dropped a word of caution to the politicians that it was prepared to give an order if the issues are not adequately sorted out. The insistence of the court was widely viewed to be on the arbitrary side and it was pointed out by many observers that it was not the judiciary’s job to direct the State Bank of Pakistani to release elections funds or direct the parties to parley.
Amidst the raging tug-of-war a sign of thaw emerged when the CJ stated that it was not the job of the court to force the political parties to negotiate. This was quite a significant shift from the earlier stance taken by the SC in a previous hearing whereby the court had asked the parties in the government and opposition to hold parleys by 26 April and gave a day for them to come to some terms. However, no talks were held with the government not complying with 4 April directive of the court. Judiciary has also directed the ECP to release funds but the initial date for the deadline expired without the funds being released. The government put the sanction for the funds in front of the NA that rejected it offhand. The SC also heard the plea of the defence ministry asking for the national and provincial polls to be held on the same day as it found it difficult to provide the required manpower for security. To further lay a fence around the SC whose actions the political elements thinks are aggressive, they have approved a bill curtailing the suo motu powers of the CJ though the SC has already pointed out that an anticipatory injunction would be applied to it. The Weekender
Talal Wasif Qavi is a barrister
Share
Get Newsletters