Daily Times

The two-member Supreme Court bench has passed an important judgement in the suomotu proceedings into the far-right Tehrik-e-Labbaik’s Faizabad sit-in.

The judgement has laid out what must serve as guiding principles for the executive in dealing with fundamental rights of the citizenry. With the era of Justice Saqib Nisar and its judicial overreach behind us, the text drafted by Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Musheer Alam can truly be a watershed moment in the country’s constitutional history. Given the range of institutions whose failure during the sit-in has come under review, the judgement can lead to course correction provided the government of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) can gather the will to implementit.

A significant aspect of the judgement is its historical value. It contextualises the manner in which the Faizabad sit-in was dealt with by state institutions with reference to earlier failures and excesses. This raises the need for state institutions to work within their mandates, and, perhaps, some education of those occupying the highest offices in these institutions can help.

The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority and the Election Commission of Pakistan have been chided by the apex court for their failure to undertake their constitutional tasks. In the former’s case, action will need to be taken against those at the helm when the sit-in happened for the violations that led to propagation of hate speech through electronic media, on the one hand, and the censorship of some TV channels’ broadcast happened under their watch. Besides, the judgement will also serve as a benchmark for the media regulator’s role in similar situations in future. This means that the regulator must always err on the side of freedom of speech and citizens’ right to access information.

The substantial part of the judgement concerns the operations of our executive agencies tasked with national security. The court has expressed reservations about the manner in which some officials were seen conducting themselves in public. Prompt measures must also be taken against them if they’re found to have violated their oaths of office. Under no circumstances can state institutions be allowed to either appear partisan or engage in politics.

With the Faizabad verdict, the SC has initiated a process that must not be stopped. It’s now the government’s turn to put the apex court’s words into action, using the mandate given to it by the electorate. *

Published in Daily Times, February 7^th 2019.