The end or a new
beginning?
In the latest
blow to be suffered by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif since the Panama case
verdict, the Supreme Court (SC) has held that disqualification from being a
member of parliament under Article 62(1)(f) is for life or at least for as long
as the judgement holds the field. The five-member bench handed down a unanimous
decision, but Justice Azmat Saeed in a supplementary note disagreed with the
reasoning employed in the judgement although he agreed in the end with the
final conclusion. While the verdict was not entirely unexpected, it has set off
a debate, with the legal fraternity divided between those who feel the verdict
is too harsh and others defending it to the hilt. This divide reflects the
broader divide in society as a whole on the issue. The PTI’s reaction of joy at
the knocking out of Nawaz Sharif from the electoral field is echoed in slightly
softer tones by the PPP, which holds Nawaz Sharif himself responsible for
bringing this upon himself. Does the verdict mean, as some reporting has it,
the end of Nawaz Sharif’s career in politics? Or, as others have argued, is it
the end of the beginning of the ‘minus one’ campaign and the start of a new
phase of resistance on his and his party’s part? Certainly, irrespective of the
merits of the SC’s interpretation of the silence in Article 62(1)(f) regarding
the length of disqualification on being found wanting on the touchstone of
being sadiq and ameen (honest and truthful), the verdict and Nawaz Sharif’s
response are likely to feed into his ongoing rhetoric of victimhood. The real
challenges for Nawaz Sharif now are to ensure his legacy endures for the
benefit of heir-apparent daughter Maryam Nawaz, protecting the Sharif assets
abroad that set off the whole chain of events up to and including the latest SC
verdict, and heading off the trend nibbling at the margins of the PML-N so far
of defections from its ranks so it can go into the coming general elections
with its strength relatively intact. On present trends, the SC verdict is
likely if anything to inadvertently strengthen his barnstorming campaign up and
down the country, but particularly in the PML-N stronghold of Punjab. Of
course, victory in the general elections for the PML-N is crucially dependent
on the polls being held in a transparently fair and free mode. Judging by the
shenanigans that accompanied the overthrow of the PML-N-led coalition
government in Balochistan, its subsequent impact on the Senate elections and
the rolling series of adverse verdicts against Nawaz Sharif by the SC, the dice
seem loaded against such an outcome. This conundrum has added to the
uncertainty looming over our heads in the run up to the general elections.
The only
possibilities for Nawaz Sharif to be able to re-enter electoral politics is if
either the superior judiciary reverses the disqualification period judgment or parliament
brings in a constitutional amendment to repeal or alter Article 62(1)(f) and
thereby overcome the fate ordained by the SC for Nawaz Sharif. Both
possibilities are fraught with uncertainty, haziness, difficulties and
roadblocks. The first envisages a reversal of the verdict under a future
superior judicial set up, but going by the track record of our jurisprudence,
seems unlikely. The second option too suffers from the difficulty of obtaining
a two-thirds majority in both houses of parliament (the PML-N has already lost
the widely expected majority in the Senate as a result of the events since the
Balochistan government debacle and the upper house elections that followed).
The received wisdom is that there is no such thing as ‘never’ in politics. Some
media reporting has referred back to the coverage accompanying Nawaz Sharif’s
conviction in the hijacking case in 2000, his sentence of 21 years and the
subsequent exile that hatched his return after many years. So far, the PML-N is
fighting the good fight through legal means. But if push comes to shove and the
general elections fail to meet the minimum standards of transparency, fairness
and free exercise of the universal franchise, the country could witness a great
deal of trouble. The difference with the past in this respect is that this is
the first time a leader from Punjab finds himself locking horns with the ubiquitous
establishment. In the classic Chinese idiom, we seem to be in for interesting
times.
No comments:
Post a Comment