Judges are often appointed based on their loyalty to the establishment rather than their competence or commitment to justice.
Syed Jahanzeeb
When we talk about democracy, one of its key pillars is an independent judiciary. It is a hallmark of governance that ensures checks and balances in a country. However, the judiciary in Pakistan has long been overshadowed by an omnipresent and domineering force: the Pakistani Army. This interference is not just a recent phenomenon but rather a systemic issue that continues to undermine democratic values and institutions in the country.
Take a step back and look at Pakistan’s judicial history, and you’ll find a pattern of judicial complicity in legitimizing military takeovers. The doctrine of necessity, a term that became infamous in Pakistan’s judicial discourse, has been invoked several times to validate military coups. From the days of Ayub Khan to Pervez Musharraf, the judiciary often acted as a handmaiden to the army, stamping its approval on actions that derailed democracy. Judges who should have been the torchbearers of justice instead became instruments of authoritarianism. The judiciary’s failure to assert its independence set a dangerous precedent for future governments.
But it’s not just about the past; the judiciary’s shackles remain intact even today. In a functioning democracy, one would expect the judiciary to protect the rights of its citizens and act as a bulwark against state overreach. In Pakistan, however, the reality is starkly different. The judiciary is often accused of selectively delivering justice, bowing to the pressures of the military establishment. High-profile cases involving dissenters, journalists, or political opponents are prime examples of how the judiciary is manipulated to serve the interests of the powerful. The question is: how can democracy thrive when its judiciary is unable—or unwilling—to protect its core principles?
This subservience to the military has far-reaching consequences. It’s not just about silencing dissent or influencing verdicts in favor of the establishment. The very legitimacy of the judicial system is at stake. Ordinary citizens lose faith in the judiciary when they see it bending to the will of those in uniform. When people don’t trust the courts, they resort to alternative means of resolving disputes, further destabilizing the social fabric of the country.
The irony is that Pakistan’s Constitution provides a robust framework for an independent judiciary. The problem lies not in the laws but in their implementation. Judges are often appointed based on their loyalty to the establishment rather than their competence or commitment to justice. This compromises the integrity of the judiciary from the outset. Moreover, judges who dare to challenge the military’s dominance face severe consequences, ranging from forced retirements to outright persecution. The recent cases of judicial overreach and coercion only reinforce the notion that the judiciary operates under the watchful eye of the military.
Now, let’s talk about the impact on democracy. When the judiciary is compromised, it becomes impossible to hold the powerful accountable. The military establishment, which already wields significant influence over Pakistan’s politics and economy, becomes virtually untouchable. This creates a vicious cycle where the military’s dominance stifles democratic institutions, and a weakened judiciary is unable to break this cycle. The result? A democracy in name only, where elected representatives have little real power, and the military continues to pull the strings from behind the scenes.
One might argue that the judiciary is not the only institution to blame for Pakistan’s democratic woes. While that is true, its role is undeniably critical. A strong and independent judiciary could act as a counterbalance to military influence. It could ensure that laws are applied equally, that the voices of the marginalized are heard, and that the principles of justice are upheld. But for that to happen, systemic reforms are needed.
The first step is to insulate the judiciary from external pressures, particularly from the military. Judges should be appointed based on merit, and their independence should be protected at all costs. Mechanisms for accountability should also be strengthened to ensure that the judiciary does not itself become a tool of oppression. Civil society, too, has a role to play. Advocacy for judicial independence must be relentless, and public opinion should pressure the judiciary to uphold its constitutional responsibilities.
International bodies and human rights organizations can also contribute by monitoring judicial practices in Pakistan and calling out instances of interference. The judiciary must be made aware that its actions—or inactions—are being watched and judged on the global stage. This external pressure, coupled with internal reforms, could pave the way for a judiciary that truly serves the interests of justice and democracy.
At the heart of this issue lies a fundamental question: what kind of Pakistan do its people envision? If the goal is a democratic and just society, then an independent judiciary is non-negotiable. It is the judiciary that must act as the guardian of the Constitution, ensuring that no institution, no matter how powerful, is above the law. The road to achieving this vision will not be easy. It will require courage, persistence, and a collective effort from all segments of society.
The judiciary in Pakistan remains under the shadow of the military, a situation that poses a grave threat to the country’s democratic aspirations. This is not just an institutional issue; it is a question of Pakistan’s future as a democracy. Breaking the military’s grip on the judiciary is not just a legal challenge but a moral imperative. The time to act is now. Pakistan cannot afford to let its judiciary remain a clot on democracy. It’s time for the judiciary to reclaim its rightful role as the guardian of justice and democracy in the ccountry.
Author can be reached on [email protected]
