DESPITE impassioned appeal by some patriotic circles, the situation is getting worse with the passage of every day and institutional clash seems to be a reality in the backdrop of inflexible and selfish actions and moves. It is now quite obvious that we have reached the dead end and something ominous could happen if damage control was not done by the relevant stakeholders at the required speed and scale. There is a real urgency as the economy and financial health of the state had started showing positive trends and political instability and a clash between the judiciary and parliament could spoil prospects for the better.
The latest bone of contention is the piece of legislation that envisages the Chief Justice of Pakistan should form benches of the apex court in consultation with two other senior-most judges of the court. Parliament decided to legislate on the subject on the plea that the discretionary powers for the establishment of benches to hear cases is not being used judiciously and that the new law seeks to empower the institution. The rationale for the said legislation came from repeated instances where a pattern was followed in the formulation of benches for politically and constitutionally sensitive subjects and the matter was also agitated from within the apex court. In the first round, both the National Assembly and the Senate passed the bill in question separately but it could not become an act because the President withheld his assent and returned it to parliament for a review. The bill was again passed in a joint session of the two houses and sent to the President again but the top court thought it appropriate to take up the issue on a petition filed by a journalist. Again the 8-member bench formed to hear the case promptly excluded all those senior judges who were known to have their own independent views on this and other issues. The PDM coalition government released a statement, which rejected the eight-member bench, terming it controversial. The allies in the federal government vowed to resist attempts to take away parliament’s authority and to interfere in its constitutional scope. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, while exercising ‘anticipatory injunction’, stayed the operation of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure Bill) 2023 aimed at curtailing the powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan to take suo motu notice and constitute benches. The ruling coalition statement termed the development “unprecedented” as the pleas were admitted even before the completion of the legislative process. It said the move was equivalent to sabotaging the credibility of the country’s highest court, making the constitutional process of justice “meaningless”. Lawyers are also questioning the ‘anticipatory injunction’ claiming it is inconsistent with the Constitution; trespasses into parliament’s domain and makes a complete mockery of settled law as well as common sense.” They point out that according to an earlier verdict of the Supreme Court it is a well-established principle of constitutional interpretation that until a law is finally held to be ultra vires for any reason, it should have its normal operation. It is understood that parliament would move further to assert itself and in the process, things could become murkier and uncontrollable. There are also implications and ramifications of the Supreme Court judgement to hold elections for the Punjab Assembly on May 14 and inability of the Government to allocate Rs 21 billion for the purpose by April 10. The Government presented a money bill before the National Assembly, which referred it to the Standing Committee concerned, that rejected it on the plea that there were no allocations for elections in the current year’s budget and the Government has no money. In this backdrop, there is a sensible proposition by a PML(N) stalwart and former Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi who said on Thursday that national dialogue was the only way to solve the myriad of issues the country is facing. He has a point when he says holding elections was of “secondary importance” and not a solution for the problems being faced by the country today adding “you also have to decide on matters that go beyond elections.” The country is deeply polarized and there is a growing impression of a division among institutions on the way forward and, therefore, a comprehensive dialogue seems to be the only viable option to put the country back on normal track. It is rightly apprehended by saner-minded people that elections without resolution of the issues involved could trigger a fresh wave of confrontation and tension, depriving the country of much-needed stability. PPP has done well by forming a three-member committee to explore the possibility of dialogue between the Government and the PTI and one hopes it would get a positive response.
