Daily Times

It is the season of colourful headlines. However, this time around, the honourable judiciary can be seen holding all the cards. A series of court decisions that continue to hit media outlets every single day have the potential to carry significant implications for the country’s politics and future.

In light of recent developments, it seems that we can no longer rely on judicial precedents because the gavel strikes in a different direction in every case. The role of the courts in carrying the burden of democracy and running the economic system cannot be made light of. Yet, there is a growing concern about the selective justice and politicization of the judiciary, which raises questions about the impartiality of the entire justice system.

As guardians of the Constitution, decisions that come out of the courts of Pakistan should be based on the principles and values enshrined in the golden scroll. However, there seems to be a clear distinction between the treatment of the powerful and the weak in judicial decisions. Some individuals are treated as blue-eyed favourites, while others are considered to be children of a lesser god. This disparity erodes the trust of the people in the justice system and undermines the principles of equality and justice.

One concerning aspect is the protection provided to those who have repeatedly violated the writ of the state. Why is it that little to no action has yet been taken on the rampant accusations of political victimisation against the National Accountability Bureau, an institution established with the noble purpose of combatting corruption and holding public officials accountable? The cases pursued by NAB seem to be influenced by political considerations, resulting in the targeting of certain individuals while many others are let go scott-free.

The new torch-bearers of higher judiciary would have to establish a coherent framework that encourages the bench to disregard their personal ideologies and political motivations while giving verdicts. There have been instances where decisions seem to align with the needs and intentions of certain influential individuals or groups; compromising the independence of an impartial judiciary and eroding public trust and confidence in the state. A good starting point might be to restore order in the affairs of our accountability watchdog. *