A free and fair election hinges largely on a citizenry that is informed. By this, we refer not to education but an environment in which politicians show clean hands or bow out of the electoral race. This was likely at the back of the Supreme Court (SC)’s mind when it directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to wrap up the three references against former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (and his family) within a month; that is, by July 10. On paper, this is not an unreasonable demand. Not least because the electorate will benefit from having the verdict delivered before everyone goes ballot-boxing. Yet here in Pakistan, nothing is ever so clear-cut. The SC had rejected the request of Nawaz’s counsel to present the three references together; though the appeal was made on the grounds that sixty percent of the arguments are repeated. At the beginning of this week, Khawaja Haris recused himself from the case altogether; citing the daily hearing schedule that includes Saturdays and Sundays. To be fair, this leaves little time for comprehensive preparation. He also unsuccessfully petitioned to be given six weeks to wrap up proceedings. As things currently stand, the elder Sharif now has until June 19 to hire a new lawyer. Naturally, it will prove nigh on impossible to get an incoming counsel up to speed at this time. Thus the only real alternative is to somehow persuade Haris to once more represent him. Though the jury remains out. Nawaz has termed the entire debacle little more than poll rigging. Unfortunately, it is difficult to dismiss such assertions as entirely out of hand. We say this not to accuse the judiciary but only to compare the treatment of that other head of state who also has cases before the courts. The SC had Gen (rtd) Pervez Musharraf’s CNIC unblocked and the former COAS has now filed his nomination papers. It therefore becomes harder to muffle the ever-increasing cries of selective justice. Especially considering that only one of these gentlemen is a thrice-elected premier. This is what Pakistan’s mainstream parties ought to be focusing on. Yet the PTI has gone ahead and alleged that the recusal is nothing more than a “ploy” for Nawaz to escape the long arm of the law. This is most unhelpful given that the country is passing through turbulent times. Moreover, Imran Khan’s party risks sacrificing due process in favour of political expediency. And he, better than most, must understand that this is not cricket. To be sure, the elder Sharif and others must answer charges of corruption. But just as democracy must name the process by which it comes into being; so, too must justice. To ignore this is to do a disservice to the country in the long-term. For if the system proves flawed, a dangerous precedent will be set. In short, if political parties are as committed to a democratic Pakistan as they claim then they must support — not Nawaz the individual — but due process for all. To do otherwise is to risk hoisting themselves by their own petards. * Published in Daily Times, June 13th 2018.