In times like these, social
responsibility entails the media to take measures for consensus building over key issues. Instead, we witness hostilities among media pundits, further ripping the already torn fabric of our frivolous democracy by creating confusion in their respective talk shows. They claim to represent the masses without their mandate, pass judgments without proving anyone guilty, make or break anyone to their own benefit and are totally unaccountable for all this. This irresponsible demeanour of the media has led to so much confusion that it has become impossible for a common person to distinguish right from wrong or, might I say, right from left. The worst part is that all segments of society seek the media’s nod of validation. Consequently, we have witnessed a politicised bureaucracy, apologetic politicians and an emotionally charged public. The situation is certainly not viable for the country but very ripe for the media.
One such influential media pundit, who claims to have a sparrow, which more often than not happens to be a harbinger of bad news to the nation, expressed his views on the former Chief Justice (CJ) Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, which in my opinion reflects a vendetta and misleads the nation. His impishly lengthy note and subsequently his talk show exposed his vengeance against the former judge. No man can, for any considerable time, wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which is the true one.
The pundit spoke of Iftikhar Chaudhry’s legacy as one leaving behind antagonised lawyers, defensive judges, disillusioned civil society, insulting opposition parties, a cynical media, resentful military and a relieved government. The dark side of Iftikhar Chaudhry the pundit so wilfully commented on, itself speaks of the former CJ’s fairness, uprightness of law and a big ‘no’ to the beneficiaries, who probably were waiting for the mangoes to ripen. The fact that he even-handedly dealt with all and sundry proves him to be an unbiased jurist.
He further labelled Iftikhar Chaudhry’s iron curtain resistance to an all powerful dictator’s will with coincidental and adequate ‘timing’, which tipped the scales in his favour. According to the pundit, Musharraf’s decision to attack the Lal Mosque, implementation of emergency and knocking down the big media houses caused Chaudhry’s rise to popularity as society’s reaction and termed it ‘political’. What he failed to mention is that Iftikhar Chaudhry was asked to resign in March 2007, whereas the Lal Mosque operation was conducted three months later and emergency was imposed eight months after the CJ’s refusal to bow down to Musharraf’s order. The jugglery of words he used on his talk show to prove Chaudhry a politician is irrelevant and baseless. Iftikhar Chaudhry gave a new face to the higher judiciary, which had been faceless for the last 60 years.
Unfortunately for the country, after its coming into existence, a clout of beneficiaries from all spheres, i.e. politicians, bureaucracy, judges, journalists and now the electronic media (thanks to Musharraf) is running the system. Chaudhry’s hallmark was to separate the judiciary from this clout, obviously injuring its motives. He made everyone accountable under the law and delivered justice to the common man. The very fact that he received more than 200,000 applications during his tenure under Article 184(3) is indicative of the fact that the whole nation looked up to him. On the other hand, the clout of beneficiaries of this unfortunate country has not delivered back to our people but has benefited our adversaries.
The pundit, who impersonates himself as Mr Perfect in his futile attempt to make Mr Chaudhry a controversial figure, amounts to throwing mud on the whole Supreme Court (SC), since all the strong verdicts came from different benches and not single-handedly by the CJ. Before criticising others, this person should not forget that his own role as a caretaker chief minister was highly controversial. Being the interim chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) and simultaneously running his television show is a sheer breach of journalistic ethics, which puts his own credibility into question.
Besides this devilish system and extremist society, people like Iftikhar Chaudhry and Fakhruddin G Ibrahim should not be idealised as angels but more importantly human beings. This pundit will do a huge favour to many Pakistanis if, instead of running after a sparrow, he follows Iqbal’s shaheen (hawk), which is a symbol of integrity, independence and foresightedness.
The writer is a retired army officer and has lived through certain sad episodes in the small history of Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected]