To think of the engineering that our most sacred legal document has undergone, its mere survival becomes a cause of celebration at times. From weathering Hans Kelson’s revolutionary legality to bearing Henry de Bracton’s necessity doctrine, it has been tried and tested with all sorts of convoluted theories. But these imported principles have still done less damage than the Machiavellian princes at home who, to quote Reza Ali, have made “our country a petri-dish for constitutional dysfunction”.
Take the events of July 22, 2022, for example. In a round of scintillating political saga, mixed with the right touch of legal thrill, we saw another turn in Punjab’s chief ministerial elections. The stage was set for the skipper to bag another win after his dazzling success in the by-elections. With the party poppers ready, mithais being ordered in advance, and the PML-Q allies successfully safeguarded in hotel rooms, it all seemed a pretty straightforward affair.
But after years of following Pakistani politics, we have learnt that election is least of all a straightforward affair. Especially when we have unscrupulous minds like Asif Zardari in the mix. His quietness should always be taken as the calm before the storm.
Bringing Chaudhrys into the equation, for starters, should never have been the way to go about it. As a party that contests on the manifesto of changing the status quo, they are the anti-thesis to everything that the PTI stands for.
Unfortunately for the skipper though, the defense sirens for this one were sounded only after it had obliterated everything.
So where did things go wrong is the question we find ourselves asking.
It was after all only a week ago that the PTI seemed to be high on the rollercoaster of success. With the dissidents being aptly punished and neutrals forced back into their headquarters, Punjab was supposed to be the PTI’s oyster.
But what appeared as success to the naked eye was in reality the combination of dubious alliances and unprincipled handshakes.
Bringing Chaudhrys into the equation, for starters, should never have been the way to go about it. As a party that contests on the manifesto of changing the status quo, they are the anti-thesis to everything that the PTI stands for. From breeding the perverse thana-culture to encouraging political compliance in the face of dictatorial regimes, there is rarely an aspect of Punjabi politics not ruined due to their uninspiring leadership. It was after all Imran Khan himself who called them “the biggest dakus (thieves) of Punjab”.
Alas, shaking hands with dakus has ironically turned out to be our skipper’s signature move in yesteryears. Only this time though, it was his own success that got looted before anything else.
With another political storm raging on Twitter, we turn to the apex court once again to drag us out of the mess that our lawmakers have created.
It’d be better to hear Abraham Lincoln’s advice on this matter, “the people are the rightful masters of the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert it”.
Legal analysts inform us that this should be a simple case for the court to decide. Article 63-A of the constitution clearly enunciates that its parliamentary party, not the party head, which gets to issue binding directions to the voting members. The definition of the parliamentary party is further expanded to include only members who have been elected in the House, meaning that the dinosaurs outside do not get to determine the voting decision of the members. Therefore, it's speculated that Punjab Assembly Deputy Speaker Dost Muhammad Mazari’s ruling will most likely be discarded by the Supreme Court.
But based on past experiences, this contributor wouldn’t give much value to the legal forecasts. Interpreting the mood of the court can be as difficult as navigating through a labyrinth at times.
Yet there are several voices who have now come together in quest for a constitutional renaissance. The time is ripe for another issue of the periodical, we are told by the newest members of our legal fraternity.
It’d be better to hear Abraham Lincoln’s advice on this matter, “the people are the rightful masters of the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert it”.
So let’s just do that instead: overthrow not the constitution, but the perverts who pervert it.