I hold no brief for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family. I did not vote for the PML-N in any of the previous elections. Nevertheless one must admit that he has been elected by a heavy mandate by the people of Pakistan. What is more is that in his latest tenure, he has gone the extra mile in not repeating mistakes of the past. The country today is in a very different, better, place from where it was in 2013. This was done despite the daunting challenges that country faces both internally and externally. In my estimate a reformed Nawaz Sharif has led the country ably and credit must be given to him, unless of course you are too miserly to do so. The narrative spun by the opposition and by a section of lawyers about the Panama Case is that this is the first time the powerful elite in the country face questions about their ill-gotten wealth. Prima facie this looks right. Here is a powerful Prime Minister facing the highest court in the land to prove that his means justified the wealth and the assets accumulated by him and his family. But is it really the first time that a Prime Minister has been brought in the dock? Pakistan’s second Prime Minister, Khawaja Nazimuddin, an honest gentleman who perhaps came closest to fulfilling the requirements of being sadiq and amin in our history even though there were no such requirements then, was sent packing by Governor General Ghulam Muhammad in the interest of the country. The case that ultimately landed before the Federal Court, as the Supreme Court was known as then, was decided against the Prime Minister and the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. The real reason why the Constituent Assembly had been sent packing in such a summary fashion was because it had dared to clip the powers of the Governor General. Four elected governments had been dismissed under the pretext of corruption and mismanagement between 1988 and 1999, irreparably harming the country The arbitrary way in which the first Republic in Pakistan was wound up in 1958 is also well known. Then the fall of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the first truly elected Prime Minister of the country, and his eventual judicial murder are also part of our history. The musical chairs between 1988 and 1999 where four elected governments were dismissed under the pretext of corruption and mismanagement irreparably harmed the country. In the fourth democratic era, the dismissal of Yousaf Raza Gilani by the Supreme Court is also part of our patchy history of unelected institutions sitting in judgment over elected ones. The three judges of the Supreme Court, two of whom I have had the honour and privilege of appearing before when they were judges in the Lahore High Court, are men of great probity and moral rectitude. If there were ever three men who could withstand the tide of manufactured public opinion, which I feel is what this hullabaloo really is, it is they. They have a unique opportunity of setting historic wrongs right. No one is condoning corrupt practices, but the right thing to do, in my humble opinion, is to defer the matter to a trial court, for doing otherwise would be a violation of Article 10-A of the Constitution. Prime Minister cannot and should not be disqualified under Articles 62 and 63 without the due process and fair trial, which is the right of every citizen of the country. A judgment disqualifying the Prime Minister would bury Article 10-A and that would be a grievous outcome for fundamental rights in the country. It would also mean a de-facto return to Article 58(2)b, the so called “safety valve” which has retarded and stunted our democracy in the past. Now imagine the vista that opens up if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is allowed to complete his term. It would be the first time a Prime Minister in this country’s sordid history would complete his 5 years at the helm. The nation would go to the polls in 2018 and decide whether or not to eject the present rulers. In a democracy people alone should have the right to eject or retain a Prime Minister’s services. It would go a long way in cementing our claim to being a democracy. It will have a salutary effect on our economy, our political stability and our future. On the converse side, if the Prime Minister is disqualified, it may lead to a prolonged period of terrible instability that might once again derail our country and our economy from the right track. This will not end here. We might again see a period of rapidly churning out prime minister after prime minister, facing similar charges and allegations, for after all, there is no one who fits the description of the prophetic qualities that the term sadiq and amin embody. There is no righteousness amongst mortals in Pakistan, only self-righteousness. No one in the world wants to deal with a country that is plagued by political instability. At the end of this dark tunnel will be another martial law for that would be the most logical conclusion of this perilous path that we propose to take. All eyes therefore are on the three men in whose hands the fate of the nation lies. May they live up to their reputation and show the fortitude to withstand pressures built upon by expectations of the self-righteous in this country. The writer is a practising lawyer. He blogs at http://globallegalforum.blogspot.com and his twitter handle is @therealylh Published in Daily Times, July 24th 2017.