No second fiddle
The judiciary has played havocs with Pakistan. Often it has justified the military coup in the country through the dictum of necessity and at few times it has supported the democratic ethos. Every time the people have paid the price.
This time it has not been different. Prime Minister Yusuf Gillani has been disqualified and he had no option except to resign to make place for a new prime minister. Yet the people have to bear the brunt. With no electricity, no water and no reprieve from increasing prices, the people would have expected the government to attend to their problems -- they even came to the streets to protest -- but the ruling Pakistan People's Party, or its boss, President Asif Zardari, have a different priority. Their all attention has been focused on how to secure their loyal successor to Gillani.
Coming to Gillani, he sacrificed himself to protect Zardari who had been held guilty for having stacked billions of dollars in Swiss banks. The Supreme Court asked Gillani to write to the Swiss authorities to get information about Zardari's bank account. Gillani refused and joined issue with the Supreme Court which held him guilty for contempt of the Court. This was as far back as April 26 this year. Gillani neither went in for appeal nor did he bother about the punishment for contempt.
Instead, Gillani went to Pakistan's National assembly to get endorsement for his stand and, surprisingly, the house gave him full support. Even the Speaker, Fehmida Mirza, who had no business to comment on the judiciary, and an independent arm of the Parliamentary system, said that the prime minister did not have to comply with the Supreme Court's order, laying down a new dictum that Parliament was superior to the judiciary.
It was a civilian coup of sorts. The arrangement would have come to stay if the army, the real power in Pakistan, had sided with the government. But the army was angry with the Gillani government which had vainly tried to bring ISI under the civilian authority. Even other wise, Pakistan Chief of Army Staff General Parvez Kayani does not have an appetite for a direct military rule. He has found back driving useful because in this way he rules without having any responsibility.
Had he sided with Gillani he would have taken on the Supreme Court, more so Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry who has caught the imagination of people after forcing through a popular agitation former Chief of Staff General Pervez for the restoration of the supremacy of the judiciary. Since then the Supreme Court has been the custodian of the Constitution.
The outgoing Prime Minister Gillani, a believer in the rule of law, could have saved himself by telling the Supreme Court that he would write to the Swiss authorities about Zardari's hidden wealth. But he preferred to be a sati, a custom among the Hindus in Rajasthan where the wife burns herself along with her dead husband.
I can understand a person staking everything on principles. Gillani did so not to bring Zardari to the book. In Gillani's case, the more apt word is hari-kari (suicide). Maybe, he had political compulsions. Probably Zardari chose him because he found in him the best stalking horse available. The next prime minister would also have to keep quiet on Zardari's money abroad. This is the requirement which the Pakistan president must have laid down before selecting the prime minister. That means that Zaradari's confrontation with the Supreme Court will have no respite.
The fallout of Gillani's ousting is positive and it means that the independence of judiciary has come to stay in Pakistan. This rectifies the earlier practice when the Chief Justices would succumbed before the military's pressure. Chief Justice Chaudhry has rightly said in his judgment: "Where will be the independence of judiciary go if the executive examines of ruling of a seven-judge bench."
I recall the time when the eminent lawyer, Aitzaz Ahsan was offered the prime ministership. But he correctly said 'no' because he told Zardari that there could not be two parallel authorities in a country. Aitzaz has been proved correct. Zardari cannot play a second fiddle, although the office of President he occupies makes him a figure head.
I think that Aitzaz was not justified in defending Gillani because the latter was in the wrong and had refused to write to Swiss authorities about Zardari's money which runs into billions of dollars and which rightly belongs to Pakistan. Aitzaz may have won on some technical point but the question was not legal but moral. Yet all marks to Gillani who knowingly took his stand which he knew would not stand the scrutiny of law.
The best course now is to have elections after Ramzan and in the meanwhile the administration should be entrusted to an interim government, an arrangement that the Pakistan constitution provides. PPP has been caught on a wrong foot and the Gillani episode is going to hurt the party at the next polls. Its performance too has been below par and the electorate will not forget this, more so Zardari's money at Swiss bank, on the polling day.
The petitions by Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan to the Supreme Court brought the government down crashing. Otherwise, Gillani would have continued as he did after April 26, when he was found guilty for disobeying the Court in committed to contempt. Although the sentence was for one day but as the petitioner had pleaded, a prime minister
who had been sentenced even for day could not continue in office. The Supreme Court upheld the plea.
Yet I sympathise with Gillani and I think that the statues should be built in Pakistan to remember that there are still some people who sacrifice all theirs for loyalty. These are very rare things and they should not go unnoticed, unapplauded. Whether he should have declined to be a sati is a matter for him to decide. But there is no doubting about his sacrifice and his loyalty.
The writer is an eminent Indian Columnist.