Constitution upheld
LAWS and the system of justice go hand in hand with human existence. In the Middle Ages, the decrees of kings were the law of the kingdom, but then the laws were limited to the subjects only.
The king himself was an exception. Then in 1215 the Charter of Rights, the Magna Carta, appeared in writing, emphasizing the formulation and enforcement of public laws, and gradually became laws that changed the world order, such as the Bill of Rights in 1689, which granted public and parliamentary rights of Settlement came after which oppression ended.
The secret of the strength of the ancient kingdoms was that there was always talk of justice and the rule of law.
When the subcontinent became part of the colonial system, the British, with their strong administrative power and proper legal and judicial system, established a solid state writ and good governance exercised.
States were required by law to be equal before the court, and the law would apply equally to all, regardless of colour, race, or rank.
Bingham writes in his book “Rule of Law” that if the state has these eight things ie easy access to law, equality before the law, proper use of legal powers, avoidance of arbitrary use of discretion, transparency in cases, resolution of disputes, the supremacy of human rights and the observance of international law, the rule of law would be much better.
The role of the judiciary in ensuring the criterion of ‘Rule of Law’ is better than that of other institutions. The judiciary interprets the constitution and is the guardian of the law.
Winston Churchill asked the British during the devastation of World War-II if the courts were doing their job? The answer is yes, then he said, “Then there is nothing to worry about.
” Therefore, in any state, the people and the ruler have a relationship of trust and confidence with the judiciary and this relationship is the basis of the rule of law.
Although political means alone are useful for the successful and final solution of political problems; however, if the parties agree on a solution based on the law, it could be a good omen not only for the country and the nation but also for the democratic and constitutional institutions.
Recently, the Supreme Court annulled the rolling of Deputy Speaker National Assembly Qasim Suri and declared the decision to dissolve the Assembly unconstitutional.
The Chief Justice ruled that their decision is by consensus, rolling was given on 03 April, notices were given to those who had given recusal.
Rolling of Deputy Speaker is unconstitutional and the no-confidence motion will remain pending.
Dissolving assemblies was against the law, dissolving National Assembly was also against the law, the National Assembly will be restored to its old position.
The federal cabinet will be restored to its posts. The adjournment of the National Assembly for an indefinite period was also declared unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has delivered the verdict certainly in accordance with the law and the Constitution.
Supreme Court’s biggest achievement was the unanimous decision that the Constitution was violated and all actions and proceedings emanating from it are a nullity.
This is not the first time in the history of Pakistan that the judiciary has positively intervened in political affairs and guided the government and the nation in the light of law and constitution.
The first Constituent Assembly was dissolved by Governor General Ghulam Muhammad in 1954 and the Supreme Court has been instrumental in bringing the country out of the constitutional and legal crisis that followed.
The series of events began at a time when the country’s first Constituent Assembly, after seven years of hard work, debate and compromise, had completed the work of drafting the first constitution of Pakistan and only formal approval needed of the Assembly before formal implementation.
All that remained was for Governor General Ghulam Muhammad to dissolve the Assembly on 24 October 1954.
This move of the Governor General was challenged by the Speaker of the Assembly MaulviTamizuddin Khan in the Sindh High Court.
The Sindh High Court annulled the Governor General’s move and restored the assembly.
However, at the end, the Supreme Court came to the aid of the government and through various guidelines the second Constituent Assembly was constituted, which passed the 1956 constitution and restored the constitutional and legal system in the country.
The 2007 nationwide lawyers’ movement which was ostensibly aimed at restoring Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, this movement played a very important role in paving the way for supremacy of constitution and rule of law in the country.
The demonstration by the present High Judiciary of Pakistan to settle important matters in accordance with the law and the constitution without fear or favour and without any pressure is part of that historic process.
The investigation of allegations of electoral fraud in 2013 by the Judicial Commission has been a major challenge for the judiciary as it was primarily a political issue, which the politicians have been putting on the shoulders of the judiciary for failing to resolve.
It has to be acknowledged that the three-member commission of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice, worked day and night and meticulously taking into account all the requirements of law and justice.
They were given the opportunity to present and they tookdecision on the basis of the evidence presented to them.
In the end, I must say that unwarranted criticism of national institutions is not appropriate. The role of the judiciary is to restore public confidence in state institutions.
Social justice and law and order are also conditional on this, otherwise social chaos and uncertainty lead to distances between the state and the people.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Islamabad.
