BATTLE lines are drawn and the feared confrontation between state institutions now seems inescapable due to selfish and egoistic approaches with serious consequences for the political, economic and judicial future of the country. After a three-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial, moved swiftly to pronounce a controversial verdict without addressing some fundamental issues, the National Assembly, on Friday, in an apparently tit-for-tat response firmly rejected the decision of the court that seeks to hold elections of the Punjab Assembly on May 14. The House advised the Prime Minister and the Federal Cabinet not to implement the decision for ‘being unconstitutional and against the law’. The National Assembly categorically maintained that the House rejects the minority decision of three judges and declares that the majority decision of four judges, which is as per the Constitution and law, is practicable.
The dangerous stage that we have reached was surely avoidable but the country is being pushed into a deeper crisis because of lack of mutual accommodation, absence of rule of law and gross interference in the domain of one another. The situation would have been quite different had the Supreme Court shown respect to the unanimous resolution adopted by the House on March 28 supporting the majority decision of four judges and demanding its implementation. This position has also been referred to in the fresh resolution pointing out that the March 28 resolution demanded of the judiciary to refrain from undue interference in political and executive matters, while various circles also demanded formation of full court reference but no heed was paid to the demand. The House also expressed deep concerns over the wrong interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution, re-writing the same through a verdict of the Supreme Court and demanding that a full-court bench should review the same. Meanwhile, speaking at a function on Thursday, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif once again urged the country’s top court to review its decision on Punjab polls delay case and constitute a full court to hear the matter saying the coalition government will accept any decision announced by the full bench excluding “two judges”. He said all stakeholders should look at their conduct and decide whether they wanted to protect the future of coming generations or indulge in fights for their personal interests and take Pakistan in a direction from where nobody could return. PTI Chairman Imran Khan has his own interpretation of the situation, apprehending that the tactics being employed by the PDM Government will not only pit the armed forces against the judiciary but also against the nation. As things stand today, we have reached the dead end and further journey by the two sides on their stated positions or lines drawn would mean acceleration of the institutional confrontation. The apex court has already issued its verdict without caring for any reaction and non-implementation of the court orders might attract penalties. On the other hand, Parliament also seems determined to assert its authority and resist all efforts which it sees as clear interference in its domain. Things would become clear by Monday/Tuesday when the Government has convened the joint session of Parliament to discuss the overall situation and future strategy while the Election Commission would submit the first report before the monitoring judge on progress of the implementation (of its verdict). There are also consistent reports about the possibility of filing references against the Chief Justice of Pakistan and three other judges of the top court before the Supreme Judicial Council. A political decision in this regard has already been taken and now a legal team is examining the issue from a legal point of view and in case references are actually filed the situation would become tricky and fluid. We have been emphasizing in these columns that the ongoing tussle would benefit none and wisdom demands sorting out differences through discussions and dialogue. PTI is dropping repeated hints of flexibility in its previously hard stance on talks with the Government and there is a need to translate these hints into practical action plans. There are some positive signs on the economic front and the window of opportunity must not be lost because of useless infighting. Otherwise too, elections without consensus on polls and without sincere cooperation of all stakeholders would not help resolve the issues involved because of extreme polarization and the tendency of not accepting results if not favourable to one.
