Original Articles

Judiciary or a tool to harass government? – by Sikandar Mehdi

Harrasser in Chief of Pakistan

People must remember the cases where Asif Zardari and Shaheed Benazir Bhutto were convicted by the infamous LHC judge Malik Abdul Qayyum. When the cases reached the SC and the evidence of Malik Abdul Qayyum’s conversation with Nawaz Sharif’s (so much for his sharafat and respect of judiciary) secretary came to light, the SC overturned the conviction. As the law goes if new evidence is brought forward in the appeal favoring the defendant, he gets exonerated and along with the decision to be set aside. Unfortunately, the FCS’ beloved CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry at that time sent back the case for retrial to the lower court, which was trend setter in its own right.
It has happened many times since the self proclaimed independent judiciary took control with the help of army, many police investigations were sent back as there was insufficient evidence to convict the persons involved. For example BOP scam, NICL scandal & Hajj corruption cases. As the prosecution aka FIA had weak prosecution material, the CJ sent it back for reinvestigation even to the point that he recommended that FIA’s management be replaced. Judiciary was only bent upon convicting the persons regardless of the fact that FIA had to doctor the investigation to please the judges. But in Mukhtaran Mai’s case, the judges found that there is ample evidence to convict the rapist but they couldn’t establish the gang rape. This sounds funny. As the precedent has been set and there for the SC judges to use, they could have asked the police to re-investigate the case again to clearly establish the involvement of other rapists too, as it is established that the rape took place on the orders of a Panchayat. Now another question arises, where is the suo motto bell to bring the panchayat to the court, aren’t they guilty of establishing a parallel judicial system? Isn’t it necessary for the Supreme Court to establish the writ of the apex judiciary?
This new version of excuse by the judiciary and media to put the blame on others for releasing the terrorists i.e. “weak prosecution” stinks foul. My dear discredited former Musharaf cronies you will always find answer to your extremist values and you have media to defend your actions. My question is this: why was an independent judiciary required?. The only work judiciary is doing is harassing government in the name of justice with the help of media. Opposition is sitting and enjoying this new kind of harassment. Can media just give one case of opposition or of public importance pending in the SC for regular hearing? They have hundreds of cases pending in the courts but never get any hearing. We want across the board justice and not the selective brand of justice as patented by Iftikhar Chaudhry. They are not providing relief to the poor and the damn lucky ones who do end up in SC get the kind of justice that Mukhtaran Mai receives. Iftikhar Chaudhry’s mentor Musharraf had said it too about Mukhtaran Mai “that rape is easiest way to get a US visa”. You are no different. The only difference is you don’t have black beard but a black robe. In totality you and your peers are black sheep.
Mukhataran Mai’s fault was that she was poor peasant, a woman and one who openly spoke against the traditional cruelty that has been meted to women in rural Pakistan. SC had the chance to stand up to the plate and do some good for the poor woman but after nine years of knocking at the doors of justice,  she got nothing. Now she has to face the fourteen men who gang raped her potentially waiting for her in her village.
We always heard that Justice is Blind but now we can see that Chief Justice is blind. Mr. Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry a word to you, Abraham Lincoln once said


“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time”