Pakistan: One more contempt notice

EDITORIAL : Daily Times

The most powerful Supreme Court (SC) in the troubled institutional history of Pakistan chaired by Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry is in the headlines once again, the consistency of which since the judiciary’s restoration is not just unusual in any democratic dispensation but also disturbing at myriad levels. The latest order issued by the august court is directed at Imran Khan, chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI), in the wake of his recent statements criticising the SC’s silence on the PTI’s petitions to order an investigation into the rigging allegations on four National Assembly (NA) constituencies in the May 11 elections. Khan has categorically accepted the mandate flowing from the elections, but his insistence on checking certain irregularities remains unaltered despite the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) inaction. Khan has been accused of scandalising the court and attempting to bring the judges of the SC into hatred, ridicule or contempt. He has been issued notice to appear before the SC today to explain why he should not be tried under Article 204 of the constitution and Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003. While Khan’s selection of words to voice his displeasure vis-à-vis the silence of the ECP and SC on his plea to look into election irregularities in four NA constituencies may have strayed into immoderation, it is imperative that the issue be dealt with with wisdom and restraint. With its judicial activism being welcomed by some, the SC, notwithstanding its good intent, seems to have inadvertently entangled the Court in too many decisions that should have remained the domain of other institutions or the lower courts. As is the practice in all well-established democracies, where the courts have proven records of fair play and unbiased proceedings — a system evolved over time — the overuse of certain processes can turn negative. The flurry of suo motu and contempt notices on the part of the SC has given birth to many controversial decisions, indirectly undermining the respect and dignity of the judiciary that is its due. The SC would perhaps have been better served by calling Khan to hear his point of view and issue an admonition regarding his choice of words and tone, instead of what has increasingly begun to look like a too ready recourse to the contempt provisions. It is the right of every citizen of Pakistan to be heard by the courts if a plea has been registered. The situation has almost reached a point where all dissenting voices, even moderately worded, are looked at as a sign of disrespect to the SC, and the power of the SC to ‘stop’ the opposing narrative through its frequent suo motu and contempt notices runs the risk of negatively affecting the standing of the judiciary. Perhaps it is time for the judiciary to journey back in the direction of judicial restraint in order to restore its respect and dignity without question or quibble.