THE judiciary is the most sanctimonious institution of the state and the individuals manning it deserve utmost respect by the people and society. However, that respect and veneration does not come automatically. The judges have to earn it through their decisions and verdicts strictly in conformity with the constitution and law premised on principles of fairness and equality of citizens. When any judge or judges deviate from these established principles of jurisprudence, then they justifiably come under criticism. Our history is replete with innumerable verdicts delivered by the pliable judges that have had debilitating impact on the polity. No wonder then that Pakistan stands at the lowest rung as far as dispensation of justice is concerned.
The Supreme Court has initiated contempt proceedings against Senator Faisal Wada and Mustafa Kamal for allegedly threatening judges, while the Islamabad High Court is pursuing similar action against those involved in a smear campaign against Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiani on social media. While the outcome remains uncertain, it’s clear that criticizing judges or threatening them is unacceptable. However, some argue that the courts have been selective in pursuing contempt cases, raising questions about consistency and impartiality in upholding judicial integrity.
How come the courts conveniently neglected convulsions of Raoof Hasan information secretary of PTI against CJ of IHC Justice Amir Farooq by Raoof during a press conference recently in which he dubbed the judge as a ‘tout’ under whose supervision Imran was convicted in different cases. Those remarks constituted much more serious allegations against sitting CJ of IHC and warranted action against the accuser. Similarly former Rawalpindi Commissioner also levelled serious allegations against Chief Justice of Pakistan for playing a role in rigging of elections. That was also a fit case for initiating contempt of court proceedings against him.
People perceive selective justice from two perspectives: one, a perceived bias towards Imran Khan’s party within the judiciary, and two, judges possibly fearing backlash from the party’s social media influence. Regardless of the reason, this selective approach raises doubts about judicial independence and impartiality. People not only desire justice to be served but also to be seen as such. However, anyone making unwarranted allegations against the judiciary must face consequences. Similarly, denigration of other state institutions, including the Pakistan Army, should be strongly discouraged.
Availing this opportunity I would also like to discuss another worrying development in the parliament. The members of the parliament are supposed to stand at a higher moral pedestal and exhibit exemplary conduct while on national duty to represent the masses. It is obligatory on them to focus on the legislative business and give top priority to national interests whether they belong to the ruling party or the opposition. But regrettably the situation is quite contrary to it. The forum of the national assembly is being used to hurl invectives at each other, disrupting the proceedings of the house and creating rumpus. One gets a sickening feeling to witness the conduct and behaviour of the members of the parliament.
What happened on Thursday when Bashir Cheema belonging to PML(Q) used obscene and unacceptable language against lady member of the house Zartaj Gul was an ultimate act of shame. Reportedly when he was making a speech in the assembly Zartaj Gul repeatedly interrupted him and kept reminding him the incident of harassment of women and their sexual exploitation at Bahawalpur University in which son of Cheema was allegedly involved. When he finished his speech and after meeting Ali Muhammad Ali Khan was returning to his seat Zartaj Gul again made some incendiary remarks. That enraged Mr. Cheem and he went up to her and whispered some filthy words in her ear. That enraged other legislators of SIC who ran towards Cheema jumping over the desks to thrash him. However the situation was saved from turning into an ugly incident through the intervention of some members of the parliament.
The episode invoked condemnation of the indiscretion committed by Mr. Cheema from both sides. Though Cheema apologized to Zartaj later on under pressure from the treasury and opposition benches and the lady accepted the apology but the assembly adopted a motion moved by SIC for suspending Cheema from the current session of the assembly. The incident clearly manifests the fact that our legislators are not well conversant with the parliamentary practices and principles of conduct by the members of the assembly. When a member is given the floor by the speakers others are not supposed to interrupt him and if they find any thing worth replying they can do so on their own turn or rising on a point of order. Throwing taunts and attempts to shame the member holding the floor is against the norms of parliamentary conduct and traditions. In the first place Zartaj Gul should have refrained from taunting Mr. Cheema and making unpalatable remarks against him. Mr. Cheema should have also shown some grace and avoided stepping over the mark by restricting himself to only a proportionate response or even neglected the provocation from a lady in conformity with traditional social courtesy towards women.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Islamabad.
Email: ashpak10@gmail.com
