WHAT has Khawaja Asif said, and what are well-informed journalists like Suhail Warraich or Hamid Mir afraid of? This question may not be on everyone’s lips, but it is certainly on everyone’s mind. Before this question, as the saying goes, bursts out, it is better to look around us. The Election Commission has stated that it will implement the Supreme Court’s decision on reserved seats. This is reassuring, but it has also said that if there are any obstacles in the implementation, it will approach the Supreme Court for guidance. Does the electoral body foresee any obstacles in this matter? It has indirectly hinted at this. This same concern has been raised by some politicians and constitutional experts.
Maryam Nawaz has questioned whether asking a person who has voluntarily joined one party to now join another party is akin to rewriting the constitution. It seems that the Election Commission shares this question. The procedure is that the Election Commission will take this question to the Supreme Court, and the judicial body will provide guidance in light of the constitution. However, people argue that while procedure is important, precedents also hold significance. This point is made in the context of recent history.
Why is the issue of precedent being raised? To understand this puzzle, many things are said, but the discussion stops at Umar Ata Bandial’s ‘Good to see you.’ This event in the halls of justice is unprecedented. This event reinforced many assumptions about these halls. Whether a king or a pauper comes before the person sitting on the seat of justice, his responsibility remains the same, symbolized by the blindfolded lady of justice. It means that everyone is equal in the eyes of the lady of justice. Since she cannot see anything, she does not know who to greet with ‘Good to see you’ and who to take to task.
When such incidents start happening in some matters or some cases and the inclination of the lady becomes apparent, it means that the balance scale has become unbalanced. Be it the Panama case or the interpretation of Article 63 of the constitution where the interpretation of floor-crossing took on a new hue. Similarly, the approach to certain bail cases has also been interesting. Aren’t these decisions interesting that there is bail in the cases established and also in the cases to be established? This is the point that is pleasantly said that there is bail in the cases you have in mind.
After the decision on the reserved seats case, many people, especially the concerned parties, think that this decision has also been included in that list, so if there is a need for any interpretation or any case decision afterward, the expectation is that the tradition will continue. These people believe that if the tradition is to continue, it means that someone’s affection has become so dominant that the constitution and law are helpless before it. History tells that such a point comes when the water, making noise, passes over the head. People feel this fear, and this is also Khawaja Asif’s concern, which he has called the danger of the constitutional system’s collapse.
Well, this was the danger, but what is it that Federal Minister of Information Attaullah Tarar expressed? Tarar Sahib said two things. He talked about banning PTI and sending a reference against some people under Article 6 for constitutional violations. As expected, these remarks would raise a storm, and it did, but this matter also stopped at one point. Such matters end up at the temple of the lady of justice. These days, people think the lady quietly lifts her blindfold slightly. Hence, the general belief is that this case will be dealt with in the same way as previous cases. Thus, the question arises, if the outcome is known, what is the purpose of this struggle?
This question is greater than a thousand questions. If the answer to this question is found, the puzzle is almost solved. Many difficult points come in the life. In such situations, whether friends or enemies, before taking any final step, first assess their and the opponent’s strength, weigh the pros and cons of a confrontation, but if both parties are wise, they also engage in dialogue. They indicate what the result will be if we continue on this path. After this discussion, if we analyze Khawaja Asif’s concern, some facts seem written on the wall. And if we pay attention to Tarar Sahib’s information, it seems to clarify in this complex situation that the flood has increased significantly, and the water is overflowing into the fields.
In this extremity, there is a middle path. Tarar Sahib tried to show this middle path. Be it Azam Nazir Tarar Sahib or Rana Sanaullah Sahib, what they have said on various occasions is an interpretation of this dialogue. Maryam Nawaz tried to explain this matter more openly. The purpose is probably to make the understanding clear. If not understood, and if an accident happens this time, it will not be caused by those who usually are but by the “flood,” determined to sweep everything away. Those showing the middle path, whether sitting in the presidency or nearby, have always been under the impact of storms, and they still are.
—The writer is contributing columnist.
