Pakistan: The judges are no caliphs

Daily Times

BY:Dr Mohammad Taqi

The religiously charged sermons, heavy doses of Persian poetry and anecdotes about figures and events from Islamic history have become a staple of the Supreme Court judges A few days ago the National Assembly’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) expressed its intention to revisit the policy of handing out plots to judges and bureaucrats and to scrutinise the accounts of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC). The PAC made public lists containing names of those who had obtained one or more plot. The lists included names of several judges and the current registrar of the SC. Even if nothing else comes out of it, the PAC and its chairperson Nadeem Afzal Gondal, MNA, have successfully flayed the last shreds of the caliphs of Islam pretence that the apex court has adopted of late. The religiously charged sermons, heavy doses of Persian poetry and anecdotes about figures and events from Islamic history have become a staple of the Supreme Court judges in their assorted judgments in high profile. Nowhere was this attempt to present themselves as the reincarnation of the greats of Islamic history more evident than the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry’s initial attempt to preside over the case against his son, Dr Arsalan Iftikhar, who was facing charges of mega-corruption. Thankfully, CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry did eventually recuse himself from the case but not before making a dramatic appearance in court with the Holy Quran reportedly displayed on his rostrum. The idea ostensibly was to invoke the imagery of the justice of the second rightly guided caliph of Islam, Syedna Umar Farooq (RA), who had not only presided over a judgment against his son, Abu Shahma, but punished him with lashes. Abu Shahma is said to have died during the punishment and the remaining lashes were delivered on his grave per Syedna Umar Farooq (RA)’s orders. However, it seems that the honourable judges of the Supreme Court only wish to invoke Hazrat Umar (RA) as their role model when they are firmly in command of the proceedings — whether against their family or others. When it comes to emulating Hazrat Umar (RA) in offering themselves for public accountability, the judges would rather remain lesser mortals like us, relying on the law supposedly shielding them from scrutiny by the PAC. The Supreme Court refused to send its registrar to appear before the PAC, saying per media reports: “The Supreme Court is not part of the government and the rules only empower the PAC to examine accounts showing misappropriation of money granted by the National Assembly. Since the sum allocated to the SC is charged expenditure on federal consolidated funds, it is not in principle granted by the assembly.” The SC was alluding to the Article 68 of the constitution, which states, “No discussion shall take place in Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) with respect to the conduct of any Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court in the discharge of his duties.” But receiving residential plots beyond one’s employment or retirement remuneration package can hardly be categorised as something done in the line of duty. The inimitable attorney-writer Saroop Ijaz has dealt deftly and in detail with the legal and constitutional problems with the SC’s flimsy plea in his column, ‘Our right to know’, in an English contemporary. But as our honorable judges are immensely fond of Islamic history and poetry, let me paraphrase for them an episode from Syedna Umar (RA)’s era recorded by his biographer and poet, Shibli Naumani, in the poem Adl-e-Farooqui ka aik waqia (an episode of Umar Farooque’s justice). One day, Hazrat Umar, while giving a sermon in the mosque, asked the congregation if they would obey him if he ordered them. A common man got up and said he refused to obey because he had plundered from the war bounty and was not fit to be the caliph thus. The man alleged that Caliph Umar (RA), who was a tall man, had taken for himself two pieces of cloth from the bounty to make the dress he was wearing that day, while everyone else has received just one piece. Now Syedna Umar (RA) had the option of shutting the man up under some pretext or other but instead opted not do so. Instead, he asked his son to stand up and bear witness. The son informed the congregation that indeed one sheet of cloth would not have been enough to make his father’s dress and that was why he gifted his share of the bounty, i.e. his sheet of cloth, to Hazrat Umar (RA). The accuser withdrew his allegation and renewed his allegiance to Caliph Umar (RA). The honourable judges of the superior judiciary wielding the false shield of Article 68 are clearly no caliphs!