AGuestOnFailure: Pakistan - A Time For Celebration?

Today marks a monumental occasion in the often tragic history of A Word On Failure, with the first ever 'Special Guest Post!' Thanks go to Akif Malik, former opening batsman for the Hamilton Boys High 3rd XI, for preparing this eye-opening and insightful account of modern Pakistan and the immense challenges the nation faces. Of course, any one, any where at any time is welcome to submit a post (rant) to nelderanddaniels@gmail.com, we are heaps keen to get all sort of crazy topics, views and lulz on this blog. Plus, its better than reading Paul D rant about hippies....


Most Pakistanis will breathe a sigh of relief as news filters in that the government has reinstated the deposed Chief Justice. It comes in time for ordinary Pakistanis to put their inhibitions aside and partake in the traditional festival of basant that heralds the arrival of spring. The chronology of the crisis goes something like this, General Pervez Musharraf deposes the Chief Justice unconstitutionally before general elections in February 2008. His party is then roundly beaten in the elections by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League (PML) who form a national unity government to rule the country. General Musharraf resigns as president leaving the PPP leader Asif Ali Zardari to take over. The PPP then fails to live up to its election promises of restoring the judiciary. The PML pulls out of government and embarks on a “long march” for the restoration of the judiciary. All this culminated yesterday in the PPP lead government finally agreeing to restore the unconstitutionally removed Supreme Court judges. So where does this leave Pakistan?

Most people agree that this is a step in the right direction; it paves the way for Pakistan’s two major political parties to work together. It also ends the bitter rivalry between the PML and PPP that was threatening to destabilise the recently elected government. One hopes that this moment marks an increase in maturity from both main political parties. In recent weeks the government was under pressure not just from the opposition but also from within its own cabinet. Sherry Rehman, herself a PPP minister resigned in protest at the government’s actions. The Chief of Army Staff General Kiyani also assured the public that the military would respect the democratic institutions in the country. All this augurs well for a reinvigorated democracy. It allows an opportunity for democracy to work. But before getting all pumped up and happy one should note that critical challenges remain.

Pakistanis have long looked at political parties and personalities with disdain. They think of democracy as a co-opt of the elite. An elite that plays a game of musical chairs in parliament, shockingly unaware of the injustice, inequity and hopelessness that infuriates the masses. The real test for both the judiciary and the political parties begins now. As one Pakistani journalist puts it “The reality is that neither man can tolerate an independent judiciary, as to do so would be quite contrary to their respective political natures.” This captures the real sentiments of the public. While they are keen for the restoration of the judiciary, they feel that neither Nawaz Sharif nor Zardari will allow the judiciary freedom to exercise its mandate. They find it hard to forget the attack by PML activists on the Supreme Court when Nawaz Sharif was in power in 1997, nor can they ignore Mr Sharif’s wish to imprison the then Chief Justice this puts Mr Sharif’s principled and moral stand under intense scrutiny. Similarly, the public remember Mr Zardari’s on the record statement offering a Supreme Court justice the office of chief justice of Pakistan providing he handed over an undated letter of resignation.

The problems don’t end with Pakistan though. If one casts an eye over the recent past to find the seeds of the conflict between the Musharraf government and the judiciary it becomes clear that the conflict emerged when the supreme court took an investigative interest in the missing persons cases. Since the War on Terror was initiated in 2001, Pakistan has been at the forefront of one of the bloodiest conflicts in the 21st century. Pakistan has lost more military personnel, police officials and civilians than any other country fighting in the war against terrorism. But pressure from the US government to “do more” has been relentless. This has led to the government embarking on scores of extra-judicial security measures. Measures that give security agencies such as the police, rangers and intelligence powers to imprison and detain people indefinitely. These measures have been highly unpopular, and its no surprise that they have been brought in question before the courts. The Supreme Court has questioned such government tactics and has instructed the government to produce a list of all detainees held without charges. This in turn creates tensions between the Supreme Court and the government, which is trying hard to win favours in the White House. It will be interesting to see if the reinstated chief justice continues proceedings in such missing persons cases.

It is natural for those in New Zealnd and the rest of the world to wonder why this is at all relevant to us. The Supreme Court and the reinstated judges have won the hearts and minds of the people. They’ve been commended for beginning the movement that liberated Pakistan from years of military rule under the military regime of Pervez Musharraf. These missing persons cases will allow the judiciary to re-establish itself as a check on the government. This is critical. In a political landscape where there are few strong and neutral institutions the re-emergence of the Supreme Court must be welcomed. For most of its existence the only stable institution in Pakistan has been the army. A reinvigorated supreme court will increase faith in the institutions of the state.

The judiciary also provides a bulwark against extremism. The militant extremists gain most of their support from the disdain felt towards a failing government. They have no real positive agenda for change. The only real attraction some Pakistanis find in the Taliban is their promise of efficient justice. Most commentators will look at any such promise from the militant islamists with suspicion. But for the millions of Pakistanis living in a state of constant fear and injustice, it’s a welcome relief. While they do not agree with most of the Taliban ideology, they are happy to ignore that. They ignore that as they can see the Taliban bringing some semblance of order and security to their society. It seems ironic even stupid to think so now, but don’t forget the decrease in poppy cultivation and crime when the Taliban were in charge in Afghanistan Also, factor in the contempt these people feel towards an elitist regime that has not only ignored their needs but periodically violated their most basic rights. Most Pakistanis feel that the government is a co-opt of the elite that acts positively to violate individual rights, in order to pander to western wishes.

Pakistan is easily the frontline on the war on terror. Its societal fabric has been burnt not just by suicide bombs but also through targeted drone strikes. Most if not all Pakistanis, have personally suffered as a direct result of the war on terror. In this environment, it should be politically palatable for a government to go after the Islamic militants. But it isn’t. It isn’t so because the war on terror is largely seen as a western effort that ignores the aspirations and values of the local population in Pakistan. While it would be grand to argue that a liberated supreme court can change this tide of public opinion, its is certainly plausible to suggest that an invigorated bench would help craft a Pakistani response to the war on terror. It provides recourse for relief. If the Supreme Court is successful at investigating the “missing persons cases” (people picked up by the ISI and CIA without any charges and held without convictions at unknown locations) it will provide a landmark. As it would signal that the court is an effective check on executive power. It would also open the possibility of putting questions before the court about the Pakistani intelligence activities, with regards to political manipulation with local elections and its involvement in the war on terror. All this would make ordinary Pakistanis realise that the war against militancy is not just an idle conflict fought to attract billions of dollars in US aid. But also a solution to Pakistan’s own problems.It would also help in changing the practices and perceptions of a corrupt government violating its citizen’s rights to pander to a western audience.

So, as the crowds gather in Lahore and the colourful kites fill the skies. It is indeed time for celebration; the restoration of the judges offers a rare silver lining. It provides, both the Pakistani government and the judiciary to win the hearts of its own people. But it also throws the challenge to the US and other foreign allies to work with the Pakistani people and not just blackmail the government into action. If the court shows a willingness to hold the government accountable and if the government proceeds to keep to the road of legality then peoples’ faith in the arms of government can be restored. And that is good, not just for Pakistan but also for a region that is starved of stable institutions. It is also critical in ensuring that providing a stable, honest and effective administration undermines the explicit and implicit support for militant extremists.

Akif Malik