The Judiciary is a part of the government which
gives meaning to law however; it is not involved in the law making process. It
has been given the power to decide legal disputes. In theory, this body is not
political and therefore independent of any leanings or biases whether external
or internal. Then again, all this is another good set of paperwork.
Pakistan’s public has placed greater trust
in the judiciary than it has in the government. This was seen during the Long
March when the public decided to help restore the –then deposed- Chief Justice
of Pakistan. The protests turned out to be successful as the Chief Justice was
restored however; public trust was quickly disbanded when the charges against
him were leaked.
Even the judiciary has not been able to
protect Pakistan’s citizens. We have seen how certain parts of the country have
formulated their own law making bodies because of the in effectiveness of and dis
trust in the national judiciary. One such example is that of the ‘Jirga’ where male,
elders decide upon the disputes of local people. Such self-help mechanism is
undoubtedly a threat to the prevailing system but we need to bear in mind that
it would not have existed had there been no need for them.
1 comment:
Mahnoor - You have very aptly described the ambivalence around the judiciary in Pakistan. The point about the 'self-help mechanisms' is very interesting. It may also interest you to look in to whether the judiciary of Pakistan is inherently flawed in structure, leading to national distrust towards it. Or people have too much trust vested in traditional bodies such as the jirga and are skeptical towards the judiciary as a whole?
Post a Comment