Daily Times

The chief justice (CJ) of Pakistan, despite innuendo from some quarters with regard to his incumbency, has quite heroically and unequivocally explicated the constitutional position and the duties of the armed forces and explicitly clarified that any action taken by the armed forces without the instructions of the federal government, would fall within the remit of Article 6 — a much touted, yet rarely used, treason clause in the constitution.

Being the interpreter, custodian and defender of the constitution, which has been the victim of demonic defilation by military commanders, he must have felt it incumbent for army officers to be conversant with their role and limitations. Yet, enthusiasts of democracy are heartened at the pronouncement being prompted by the forecasts of doom and departure of the democratic dispensation being generated by media mavens, anchors and analysts determined to drum in a direct or deployed dictatorship. The chief certainly must have been pained at the doom mongers’ debates and diatribes. Or perhaps he smelt the devil’s potion being brewed in enigmatic enclaves and decided to wave a prophylactic wand to vanquish the gathering threat and turbulence.

Whatever the reasons, his asseveration has been quite timely and encouraging but mere enunciations and exhortations are not enough to deter the demons of dictatorship. For Instance, Ijazul Haq, flaunting the DNA of the country’s most diabolical dictator coded in his innards, almost instantly blustered, “Even the CJ cannot stop Martial Law.” So, some very resolute, concrete, concerted and potent preemptive policies have to be enacted to contain the curse. The superior lords can well realise that their injunctions would be meaningless when the 111 Brigade actually trundles into civilian sanctuaries. The daring and swift judicial stroke, and steadfast stand, on November 3, 2007 was a radical reversal from the judiciary’s erstwhile genuflection to the generals. Yet, in reality it changed little till a mammoth mass movement, and blood and sacrifice removed the dictator.

Another bitter truth about military interventions is that they are never spontaneous, but circumstances particularly propitious for them are cunningly orchestrated by manipulating and exploiting events to stir a general furor for intervention. So, an effective deterrence by the Supreme Court (SC) would be to initiate a strategy of invoking the preamble and related clauses of the constitution stipulating improvement of quality of life of the citizens. Strictly speaking, apportioning tax receipts and revenues is an inviolable prerogative of parliament. Yet, the SC can pronounce that the pathetically persistent failure of successive governments to effect betterment of the people contravenes meaningful compliance with relevant clauses of the constitution. It can also encourage parliament to establish binding formulae like allocating at least two thirds of the entire federal, and three fourths of provincial receipts, to essential common basic needs excluding security and defence expenditure. A realistic revision of the security policies and packages, prioritising and focusing on genuine needs like neutering terrorism, could spare funds to reduce paralysing fuel shortages, power outages and the railway and air services. A country caught between mounting debt spirals and defiance and hatred of donors can only survive if it spends most of its sources to stimulate income, employment and resource generating sectors. Welfare and dividends for the masses are essential to sustain popular hope and faith in the democratic system. But some in our politicians, the media and the agencies have unfortunately whipped up a drive to deride this system, drilling in doubts and disenchantment towards it. Their outbursts have thrown up a new challenge for the CJ to actualise his resolve.

PML-N’s claims of the agencies’ involvement in prepping Imran Khan to torpedo a credible two party system, for instance, is certainly not an ordinary accusation and a suo motu subpoena to the spy masters for an explanation is long overdue. We have witnessed how media madness about the Kerry-Lugar bill was stirred. The media is currently also reporting the commanders’ reservations regarding Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status to India. The legality and implications of their overt reaction to the memo scandal would be evident to the lords already seized with the related petition. Patent threatening calls to a federal minister were reported. Kayani is reported to have rejected suggestions of a takeover in a recent corps commanders’ conference. His Lordship, therefore, must sift the constitutionality of these brazen proposals and their propagation in the national press.

The media, despite being a pillar of democracy and hence bound by an innate obligation to its defence and preservation, has been almost ceaselessly sounding the doom and departure bugles for democracy, announcing its outright imminent end to be replaced with the judge-general combo or a kindred praetorian pattern. A pugnacious regular on a channel has repeatedly cast curses and imprecations on democracy with ‘main is jumhooriyyat per la’nut bhejtau hoon” (to hell with this democracy). Another raspy pundit has paraded supra-constitutional mechanics for removal of Zardari following a demand for his ouster by Shahbaz Sharif. The army, rather than being treated as an integral auxiliary of the federal government, is invariably projected as a disparate independent entity. Parliamentarians are persistently parodied and ridiculed while the secondary institutions derived from them are glorified. The superior lords therefore have to examine how this conduct and cacophony squares with article 6. The chief’s advice to the rookies was really admirable but incisive regulatory action has to be taken against their mentors and their media representatives. Democracy in this country can never survive without real compliance with the constitution by the media and its masters.

The writer is an academic and freelance columnist. He can be reached at habibpbu@yahoo.com