Need for patience

Supreme Court Bar Association President Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, widely respected both inside and outside the country for his steadfast espousal of the cause of judiciary’s independence, is beginning to allow thoughtlessness to get the better of judgement. He raised many eyebrows when he held a joint press conference, last Friday, with the PTI Chairman, Imran Khan, where he reiterated his call on his own party, the PPP, and the PML-N to secure the restoration the deposed judges by March 7 or hold a lawyers long march on March 9. This date being the first anniversary of Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry’s first dismissal by President Pervez Musharraf has a special significance, yet it is inopportune for starting a long march immediately. The Supreme Court Bar President’s colleagues in the lawyers’ movement, including former Justice Tariq Mehmood, took exception to his sharing a platform with a political leader who had also vowed to join the long march. Their concern, understandably, is not to be aligned with one or the other political party; they wish to move forward essentially as a Legal Fraternity movement. If the joint news conference was an act of indiscretion, Aitzaz will be expected to learn a lesson from his professional colleagues’ reaction. What is particularly inexplicable about his pronouncements is the insistence on starting a long march on March 9, even though, he says, the legal fraternity is satisfied with the agreement between PPP co-Chairman Asif Ali Zardari and PML-N leader Mian Nawaz Sharif to restore the judges. Addressing lawyers at the election of the Lahore High Court Bar Association, Aitzaz said the legal fraternity was providing a chance to the new Parliament to reinstate the judges, “otherwise, they are all set to hold a rally in Islamabad on March 9.” Indeed, the legal community needs to keep the parties in the new Parliament under pressure so that they do not put the issue of judiciary on the backburner. Restoration of the independence of judiciary must be a priority issue on this Parliament’s order of business.
But it makes little sense to deliver an ultimatum to Parliament to act even before it has met. The PPP and the PML-N need to be trusted when they say they will honour their pledge but it would take some time to work out the modalities. In fact, others in the lawyers’ movement tend to agree with this position. That is probably why former Justice Tariq Mahmood, while responding to Aitzaz’s push for haste also, called for “care and deliberation.” As it is, Aitzaz and many other legal experts hold that an executive order would be sufficient to restore the judiciary dismissed by President Musharraf through his November 3 proclamation of ‘emergency’. Some, though, differ. Assuming Aitzaz has valid legal reasons to call for change through an executive order, but a new government can do that only after it comes into existence. Surely, he does not expect the current caretaker executive to issue such an order. Which means all those who have been participating in the movement for judicial independence and the rule of law must wait until the just elected Parliament starts functioning and a new coalition government is installed in office. If that government drags its feet on the issue only then the talk of a long march and the threat of shifting the centre of ‘gravity of power’ from Parliament to the streets would have relevance. The SC Bar President must hold his horses for now, and announce a postponement of the long march plan.





On credible assurances

THERE is something eerie about the IAEA suddenly laying its hands on information suggesting Iran may have continued secret work on nuclear weapons beyond ’03, which was when the CIA said Teheran abandoned the forbidden path. With formal declaration of the evidence on part of the IAEA pending, the charge seems suspect as it came two days after the Agency appreciated increased transparency on Teheran’s part, but left grey areas by still asking for “credible assurances” that it was not developing a bomb, somewhat contradicting itself. Furthermore, the information that came from ‘multiple sources’ challenging American intelligence findings found quick favour with Condi Rice, who apparently saw a “very strong case” for a third round of sanctions against Iran, putting pressure on the UN Security Council meeting in Washington over the disputed programme. Considering the recently increased rhetoric from both Israel and the outgoing Bush administration, there seems appreciable weight in Iran’s counter argument that frustrated with its efforts over the last three years, the West is again trying to manoeuvre pieces around Iran, implying imminent complications on the Middle East’s geopolitical chessboard. America’s quick reaction to a yet unproven suspicion betrays a haste that is not supported by on ground developments, but becomes easier to understand considering the waning time frame at the hands of the neocon dispensation occupying the White House. None of the parties to the confusion ought to need reminding of how foreign interference and occupation have turned much of the Middle East into a powder keg ready to explode. A strike on Iran would definitely ignite the fuse that throws the entire region’s fortunes into chaos.
Iran is no pushover and has the capability of hitting Israel as well as American forces and interests in the region, not to mention yielding influence over various groups and Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Then there’s the oil-hit as Iran would surely move to curtail supply and block essential trade routes. The US is already reeling from the disaster in Iraq. If Washington is banking on a successful limited strike to halt what it sees as Iran’s dangerous ambitions to improve its fortunes, then it is about as much off the mark now as it was when it went ahead with the Iraq occupation in defiance of overwhelming international opinion. The Middle East is in desperate need of an end to the Iran-West standoff. Since Iran has still not violated the NPT in any way, the burden of proof falls on the US. So far, the only “credible assurances” it has sought amount to a complete shut down of the uranium enrichment programme. It is clear that such an approach will not do. So the US must now respond with either proof or muscle, and the final show cannot be too far off.

—Khaleej Times