.
.
.
Does the Pakistan Supreme Court have their eye on the ball? Are they really doing their job? A major plank of their work, as is the case with most Supreme Courts around the world is to act as the Guardians and Custodians of the Pakistani constitution.
The Swat Taliban deal with the Pakistani central government is unconstitutional:
- Under the 1973 Constitution, Fundamental Rights include security of person, safeguards as to arrest and detention, prohibition of slavery and forced labour, freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom to profess religion and safeguards to religious institutions, non-discrimination in respect of access to public places and in service, preservation of languages, script and culture.
- The judiciary enjoys full supermacy over the other organs of the state.
- Preamble: "Therein shall be guaranteed fundamental rights, including equality of status, of opportunity and before law, social, economic and political justice, and freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association, subject to law and public morality".
- Wherein the integrity of the territories of the Federation, its independence and all its rights, including its sovereign rights on land, sea and air, shall be safeguarded;So that the people of Pakistan may prosper and attain their rightful and honoured place amongst the nations of the World and make their full contribution towards international peace and progress and happiness of humanity.
- Dedicated to the preservation of democracy achieved by the unremitting struggle of the people against oppression and tyranny;
- Inspired by the resolve to protect our national and political unity and solidarity by creating an egalitarian society through a new order;
- Do hereby, through our representatives in the National Assembly, adopt, enact and give to ourselves, this Constitution."
- The Nizam-i-Adle agreement surely goes against the fundamental concepts of the Pakistani constitution.......or do I not know what I am talking about constitutionally, legally or morally.
The situation around the deal, after the deal is agreed is rapidly becoming unconstitutional:
- The armed invasion of neighboring areas, is unconstitutional.
- The expulsion of other political groups from their area of control is unconstitutional.
- The confiscation of private property from lawful owners, and its redistribution without following proper sale of property procedures, is unconstitutional.
- The mobilisation of additional private militia fighters of all backgrounds without the approval of the state security apparatus, is unconstitutional.
- The imposition of a specific type of religious ideology, to the detriment of other sects of the Muslim faith, is unconstitutional........and even against the basic tenets of the Koran.
- The open arms offered to OBL, and Mullah Omer with their armed cohorts to come into the area of Swat Taliban control is unconstitutional.
- The complete obstruction and standing of the existing security forces, and especially the local Police, is unconstitutional.
- The vandalism and destruction of private property without offering any type of compensation, is unconstitutional.
- Creating fear and anarchy so that large number of people flee from the area under their control, is unconstitutional.
- Exhorting others in the rest of Pakistan to follow their example, through an unlicensed medium, is unconstitutional.
- Making the Pakistani military seem totally irrelevant and impotent.
- Denying women and girls their full rights, as guaranteed under the 1973 constitution.
- Protection of minorities, both religious and sectarian.
What does the Supreme Court have to say about this whole unconstitutional mess? Will they wait until the Taliban arrive at the gates of the Supreme Court and kick them out of their irrelevant positions? Will they release more fundie hardliners in time for the Taliban's coronation in Islamabad?
But surely the Pakistan parliament, the noble representatives of the people voted unanimously in favor of the deal, so how can the Supreme Court go against such a decision? Well Parliaments in the majority have been known to make mistakes, for example the House of Senate and representatives in the USA, and their support for Bush II and the wholly illegal Iraq war and ditto Westminster with Blair.
In such serious situations whether through the application of its writ and law, or through the formulation of opinion it is the duty of the Pakistani Supreme Court to point out the obvious unconstitutional implications of the recent Swat deal, and the even more obvious unconstitutional implications of what is unfolding in and around Swat. If they are not sure, they could hire first year law students from Peshawar University to guide them.
