Taunt and rejoinder


PRIME Minister Imran Khan has done well by restraining spokespersons of the government from offering any comments on the statement made by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Asif Saeed Khosa on the issue of departure abroad of former Prime Minister Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif. This is a healthy development as there should be no impression or perception of institutions speaking through media and that too in a blame-game style.
Issues, problems, crises and challenges do crop up and efforts are made at different levels and through various platforms to address them in the best national interest as states cannot progress and prosper if these are allowed to persist unnecessarily. Pakistan has a clear and elaborate constitutional and legal system that delineates roles and responsibilities of different pillars of the state and institutions and every one of them is entitled to work within the framework of the Constitution and the law. It is quite obvious that when decisions are made either by the executive/parliament or the judiciary, these are not always universally accepted but one has to consider the overall background and rational of such decisions. If a decision is not liked by one particular segment of the society then it is not necessarily a wrong decision and at times there are also clashes of interests. The worthy CJP has rightly pointed out that it was the Government that allowed Mian Nawaz Sharif to proceed abroad for medical treatment and the judiciary only decided the modalities of the travel. However, to all those who care about the system both the ‘taunt’ and the ‘rejoinder’ were uncalled-for because institutions should never talk to each other like this and that too publicly irrespective of the fact whether or not they like each other’s actions or not. The judiciary committed no crime by allowing an ailing person to exercise his right of right medical treatment. On the other hand, the CJP thought it appropriate to defend the decision publicly and in the process refer to judgements of the judiciary that are not considered to be perfect or universally acceptable to be taken as precedents. There is definitely need for upholding the independence and neutrality of the judiciary as no society can progress without a fair judicial system that ensures dispensation of justice to all. No one should be wronged or favoured irrespective of his/her status.

Previous articleModi’s ‘two nations’ agenda needs a push back
Next articleIndia continues to smart under Pakistan’s Kartarpur initiative