Chronicles Foretold - Lawyers' Movement Being Hijacked by the Right Wing by

Chronicles Foretold - Lawyers’ Movement Being Hijacked by the Right Wing by

Raza Rumi, The Friday Times‏

From: Shaheryar Azhar (New York)
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 1:02:28 AM
To: S. Azhar

Posted by forum member Raza Rumi. Excellent article - Raza lays bare the simplistic assumptions that lie behind the ‘lawyers’ movement’ as it has evolved in the last two years. It shows the parallels between the “PNA Movement” against Bhutto and how it was hijacked by the Islamists who reaped the real benefit and the extreme danger that eventually similar fate awaits this movement. Shaheryar Azhar, moderator, The Forum
Excerpt: “Now the secular and revolutionary lawyers are preparing for the second long march, and this time they have an array of allies in the form of various political parties. There is the PML (N) with mass support in the Punjab, the right wing Jamaat-e-Islami, and individuals like former ISI chiefs, a former bureaucrat-associate of Generals Yahya Khan and Ziaul Haq, as well as former President Ghulam Ishaq Khan. There is also the sports star turned politician Imran Khan, and a host of TV anchors and reporters who have emerged as a new power centre in the last few years. A common thread among the political supporters of the lawyers’ movement is a soft corner for the Taliban and a justification for their barbarity in the name of US excesses across the globe and in particular the bombing of civilians on Pakistani territory. Curiously, the consensus among these motley groups is the mantra that ‘this is not our war’. One would question how calls for ‘rule of law’ would reconcile with prescriptions of jirgaas by Imran Khan and ‘Sharia’ systems of justice by others. Strange bed fellows? Not really.”…The current imbroglio concerning the deposed Chief Justice, a pawn in the hands of political groups and super-ambitious individuals on the one hand, and a blundering and wavering administration led by Zardari on the other, has become virtually untenable.

…By design or by default, the entire discourse around the lawyers’ movement ignores and by implication subverts structural changes that lie within the domain of legislative and political action. After all, who can deny that legal frameworks that disempower the poor are strictly the tasks of legislatures and representative executive authorities. We have enough ‘rights’ rhetoric here too. But citing individual cases of judicial activism is neither here nor there. The Mughal bells of justice are a medieval legacy and cannot be revived, much as we would like to pander to the popular imagination locked in enlightened despots, judicial or otherwise."

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Raza Rumi
Date: Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Subject: Chronicles foretold
To: “shaheryar. azhar”

Chronicles foretold

The lawyers’ movement is being hijacked by the right wing say Raza Rumi and Asad Sayeed

The ambitious general Chishty effected the coup d’etat sardonically named Operation Fairplay. Is it not ironic that the same General is today an avid supporter of the lawyers’ movement, without ever apologising to the nation for the monumental damage he did?

The two years old lawyers’ movement is now entering its decisive phase. It started in March 2007 as a spontaneous, vibrant expression of fatigue with a military dictator, after which the lawyers mobilised Pakistan’s inert middle classes and sections of civil society against the arbitrary ouster of the former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, and his subsequent maltreatment at the hands of the security agencies. Within weeks, the political parties jumped into the fray and mounted a formidable challenge to an otherwise seemingly well-entrenched military rule. This was a critical year when General Musharraf had assured both the world as well as the nation of a transition to democratic rule. However, Musharraf’s efforts to direct the transition in his favour were forcefully countered by the lawyers through a judicial and political struggle that continues to date.

During 2008, elections were held, civilian governments at the centre and provinces were formed, and subsequently Musharraf was ousted, but the issue of the judges remained a bone of contention. The PPP government managed to ‘restore’ most of the judges sent home under the November 2007 emergency proclamation - a first in Pakistan’s judicial history where judges deposed by military rulers were re-appointed with full seniority. However, the deposed Chief Justice was not restored. The reinstatement of the Chief Justice therefore became a rallying point for the lawyers’ movement and later it was the apparent cause of fissures between the PPP and PML coalition.

Now the secular and revolutionary lawyers are preparing for the second long march, and this time they have an array of allies in the form of various political parties. There is the PML (N) with mass support in the Punjab, the right wing Jamaat-e-Islami, and individuals like former ISI chiefs, a former bureaucrat-associate of Generals Yahya Khan and Ziaul Haq, as well as former President Ghulam Ishaq Khan. There is also the sports star turned politician Imran Khan, and a host of TV anchors and reporters who have emerged as a new power centre in the last few years. A common thread among the political supporters of the lawyers’ movement is a soft corner for the Taliban and a justification for their barbarity in the name of US excesses across the globe and in particular the bombing of civilians on Pakistani territory. Curiously, the consensus among these motley groups is the mantra that ‘this is not our war’. One would question how calls for ‘rule of law’ would reconcile with prescriptions of jirgaas by Imran Khan and ‘Sharia’ systems of justice by others. Strange bed fellows? Not really.

The complexion of the 1977 Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) movement against Bhutto also had a similar masala mix: from the religious right to the secular National Awami Party led by Wali Khan, Air Marshal Asghar Khan’s Tehreek-i-Istaqlaal and the dyed in the wool ‘democrat’, Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan among others. The liberals and the right-wingers joined hands to bring Bhutto down. Admittedly, Mr. Bhutto’s style of governance and also the threat to various interests, including that of provincial elites, had polarised the country. But the outcome of the PNA movement was not just inimical for the democratic system but for future generations as well, since the dark and brutal years of Zia-ul-Haq destroyed the very foundations of Pakistani society. Since the Zia era, we are still reeling under the state’s espousal of jihadi policy, the ascendancy of retrogressive forces, and political engineering along ethnic, biraadari , and parochial lines. True, the PPP and the PNA did come to an agreement in 1977, but before that could be implemented the ambitious General Chishty effected the coup d’état sardonically called Operation Fairplay . Is it not ironic that the same General has today become an avid supporter of the lawyers’ movement without ever apologising to the nation for the monumental damage he did in the past, and for which he has never been held accountable? The constitutionalists of today have not questioned Chishty for his role in the sabotage of Pakistan’s only consensus Constitution of 1973.
The current imbroglio concerning the deposed Chief Justice, a pawn in the hands of political groups and super-ambitious individuals on the one hand, and a blundering and wavering administration led by Zardari on the other, has become virtually untenable. Over two thirds of the judges sacked by Musharraf are back in office, but since they were not reinstated with an ‘executive order’ they are suspect and seen as betrayers of the lawyers’ movement and its lofty objectives. It is a separate matter that many leading lights of the movement have been appearing before the PCO courts to service their powerful, corporate clients, while hundreds of junior lawyers, especially those in the Mufassil districts have been out of business and have thus become fodder for public rallies and protests.

The leadership of the movement is a curious mix as well: a former Musharraf minister is a spokesperson for the Chief Justice, and corporate lawyers talk about ‘revolution’ and ‘social justice’ as if untrammelled accumulation of wealth was a divine byproduct of the strengthened rule of law. When the supporters of the movement chant slogans comparing a civilian ‘elected’ President to a domestic pet, it provides an ominous insight into the level of respect that they have for the democratic process.

Recently, a top leader of the lawyers’ movement opined that the consolidation of the rule of law will lead to foreign investment, and that would bring ‘prices’ down. One waits for him to elaborate upon this curious economic logic, which, if nothing else, will win him the Nobel Prize in the discipline. Others have held that inflation, poverty, terrorism, security and almost all the crises of the Pakistani state would be handled by the free judiciary, led of course by the individual of their choice.

The rise of Islamism and its associated militancy is also viewed through black and white lens – the lawyers and their right wing supporters in the media, along with political parties, insist that the restoration of the Chief Justice will counter terrorism, and the influence of the US will be negated in domestic affairs. Missing persons who have been illegally detained by Pakistan and its allies in the war on terror are cited as a case in point. However, this is only one side of the story: the illegality of the method is deplorable and unjustifiable, but extolling the ‘missing’ as warriors against US imperialism is not. For the operatives of militant groups make no distinction between a Pakistani and an American, between a military base and a girls school. The silence of constitutionalists regarding this madness being unleashed on us is worrying, to say the least.

But the solutions to Pakistan’s state crises are even more off-beam. The clamouring for ‘justice’ takes place at the local level – not in the higher courts or even district courts. Social injustice is embedded in land relations, slavery, poverty and the denial of economic opportunity. Our judges have already undone the partial land reform of the 1970s, and have also bailed out financial cartels time and again.

By design or by default, the entire discourse around the lawyers’ movement ignores and by implication subverts structural changes that lie within the domain of legislative and political action. After all, who can deny that legal frameworks that disempower the poor are strictly the tasks of legislatures and representative executive authorities. We have enough ‘rights’ rhetoric here too. But citing individual cases of judicial activism is neither here nor there. The Mughal bells of justice are a medieval legacy and cannot be revived, much as we would like to pander to the popular imagination locked in enlightened despots, judicial or otherwise.

Raza Rumi is a regular writer for TFT. Asad Sayeed is an economist based in Karach

www.pakteahouse.wordpress.com
www.lahorenama.wordpress.com
www.taraqee.wordpress.com
Raza Rumi :: Saatchi Online - Show your art to the world

“..society is now one polished horde,
formed of two mighty tribes, the bores and bored.”

Long March - A Long View by Beena Sarwar, IPS News‏

From: Shaheryar Azhar
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 12:47:47 AM
To: S. Azhar
Posted by forum member Beena Sarwar.

Excerpt: ““There are only a handful of us,” one of them told IPS. “And there are no more than 100,000 lawyers in the country. So we have to join hands with political forces who agree with us on this matter even if we don’t agree on other matters. We know they are using us, but we are also using them.”…Observers fear a breakout of violence even though the long march leaders have promised to keep matters peaceful.”

Begin forwarded message:
From: beena-issues
Date: March 13, 2009 3:23:53 AM EDT
Subject: Digest Number 765
POLITICS-PAKISTAN: Long March - A Long View
Analysis by Beena Sarwar
On the ‘Long March’ to Islamabad.
Credit:Rahat Dar/IPS

KARACHI, Mar 12 (IPS) - Barely a year after being elected, the Pakistan government faces a political storm involving a street agitation spearheaded by lawyers and opposition political parties allied with religious parties.
Lurking on the sidelines is an army unused to civilian command even as religious militants create havoc around the country.

None of this is new to Pakistan but many find it all the more painful given the hopes built up by last year’s general elections. On Feb 18, 2009, Pakistani voters overwhelmingly supported non-religious parties and rejected those that had been propped up by the army.

The electorate’s rejection of the religious parties and the joining hands of the late Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and her former rival Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) raised expectations of an end to political confrontation and religion-based politics - and the army moving away from politics.

These expectations followed decades of misrule and exploitation of religion for political purposes. The Pakistani establishment, at Washington’s behest, strengthened armed militancy, exploiting religious sentiments to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan during the 1980s. In the process they created ‘Jihad International’, as the late scholar Dr Eqbal Ahmad termed it.

This may now be the biggest threat facing Pakistan - and the world - since the attack on the World Trade Center on Sep. 11 2001. Since then Washington has pushed Islamabad to fight the very forces of militant Islam that both together had fostered and strengthened.

Resultantly, this country has, as Pakistanis point out, suffered the most from militant attacks.

In this situation, political instability is distracting at best and dangerous at worst. The ‘long march’ demanding the reinstatement of chief justice Iftikhar Mohammed Choudhry, spearheaded by the legal fraternity and sections of civil society, has ready allies among the right-wing political opposition.

This includes Sharif’s PML-N and the Jamaat-e-Islami, a mainstream religious party sympathetic to militant Islam, as well as others sympathetic to the Taliban, like ex-chief Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and anti-India hawk Gen. (retd.) Hamid Gul, retired bureaucrat Roedad Khan who brutally quashed political opposition during the Zia years, and cricket hero-turned politician Imran Khan, chief of the Tehrik-e-Insaaf (Movement for Justice).

All these forces boycotted the 2008 polls, except Sharif who rescinded his boycott decision after Bhutto convinced him that elections were the only way forward.

Long-festering tensions between the PPP and PML-N came to a head with a Supreme Court ruling of Feb 25 barring Sharif and his brother Shahbaz Sharif from holding elected office. Bhutto’s widower, President Asif Ali Zardari is widely believed to be behind this controversial ruling.

The disgruntled Sharifs, already pushing for the reinstatement of Choudhry, have flung themselves wholeheartedly into the long march - a move that observers do not see as entirely altruistic since their stated aims include effecting regime change.

“Sharif’s attempts to paint himself as a radical, grassroots activist are at odds with his political origins,” commented former lawyer and Australia-based analyst Mustafa Qadri, writing about the opportunity Pakistan’s politicians of all hues have wasted in their “refusal to look beyond personal power games and provincialism to develop the nation’s still embryonic democracy”.

The Sharifs gained prominence as businessmen patronised by General Zia -ul-Haq who was behind Pakistan’s “transformation from majority-Muslim nation to Islamic state with more conservative religious seminaries per capita than any other country in the world,” as Qadri put it (‘Long march to nowhere’, The Guardian, Mar 10, 2009).

The current imbroglio comes on the heels of loaded statements by Gen. (retd) Pervez Musharraf who during a visit to India last week, gave several talks and interviews in which he hinted at a possible political comeback.

Curiously Musharraf, who stepped down as president in August 2008, urged New Delhi to stop ‘bashing’ the Pakistan army and the shadowy ISI since, according to him, they were the best defence against the growth of the Taliban and militancy in Pakistan.

President Zardari has invited comparisons to Musharraf because of his government’s use of police force and mass arrests to prevent the long march, as Musharraf did after suspending Choudhry in March 2007 and imposing Emergency rule in Nov 2007.

The irony is illustrated by the recent three-hour detention of the firebrand women’s rights and political activist, Tahira Abdullah, who has been mobilising the lawyers’ movement from her home in Islamabad.

She faced police batons and tear gas in the Zia and Musharraf eras. A day before the long march began, a police contingent arrived at her house and virtually broke down her kitchen door.

However, her arrest attracted media attention, embarrassing the government into quickly ordering her release. An undeterred Abdullah immediately resumed mobilising for the agitation.

“It is sad and ironic that the PPP government has come to this,” she told IPS. “They said it was preventive detention. They can’t catch people like (Taliban leaders) Baitullah Mehsud and Maulvi Fazlullah but they send police after me, a very ordinary person.”

There is also irony in progressive, secular activists like Abdullah joining hands with the emerging right-wing coalition to achieve a shared goal, the restoration of Choudhry.

Civil society activists privately admit that otherwise their numbers are too small to reach the critical mass needed to effect political change.

“There are only a handful of us,” one of them told IPS. “And there are no more than 100,000 lawyers in the country. So we have to join hands with political forces who agree with us on this matter even if we don’t agree on other matters. We know they are using us, but we are also using them.”

Observers like the political economist and former student activist S.M. Naseem fear that this kind of mutual ‘using’ could push Pakistan further towards right-wing forces.

Disappointed by the performance of the government as well as the opposition, he holds that the lawyers’ movement has missed the opportunity of creating a new polity in the country. “They should have broadened the agenda to create a new political system,” he told IPS. “Two years for the restoration of one person (Choudhry), however, honest and bold, is a bit too much.”

Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gillani has said that he cannot, in all conscience, oppose the long march. “We have also participated in street agitations and long marches,” he said. “How can we stop anyone else from exercising their democratic right to do so?”

This stand appears to pit him against President Zardari, holding an office strengthened by past military dictators. The President’s powers include being able to dismiss the prime minister and dissolve government - as several presidents before him have done. This is unlikely to happen now. For Zardari to take such a step would mean dismissing his own government.

Having recently obtained a majority in the Senate, the PPP can conceivably push through the constitutional amendments it proposed in May 2008 for which a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly and the Senate is required. These amendments include the removal of the 17th amendment that allows the President to dismiss government.

Moves towards reconciliation between the PPP and the PML-N continue behind the scenes, even as the long march kicks off with lawyers and political activists from various cities heading towards Islamabad to converge by Mar. 16 for a dharna (or sit-in) ‘until the Chief Justice is restored’.

Observers fear a breakout of violence even though the long march leaders have promised to keep matters peaceful.

Financial Times

COMMENT & ANALYSIS

EditorialBurning Pakistan

Published: March 12 2009 19:06 | Last updated: March 12 2009 19:06

To the victor the spoils. That is the reductive, zero-sum philosophy that underlies politics in Pakistan. It is giving a dangerous new dimension to the crisis in Pakistan, where government and opposition are going at each other as if their country were not fighting for its very survival.
Barely a year after the restoration of civilian rule, and hardly six months after the final exit of General Pervez Musharraf, a new power struggle has erupted between the government of Asif Ali Zardari and the opposition led by Nawaz Sharif.

The issue at stake – the principle of an independent judiciary – is very important. But the way it is being tackled by Pakistan’s political elite – looking for factional advantage while jihadis and insurgents overrun swaths of the country – is breathtakingly irresponsible.

Mr Sharif and his allies are marching on Islamabad to demand the reinstatement of judges sacked by Gen Musharraf, in particular ­Iftikhar Chaudhry, the chief justice around whom the civic movement that eventually brought down the general first coalesced.

Mr Zardari, elected in a wave of sympathy after his wife, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated by jihadis, has so far refused. Furthermore, he appears to have used the judges he inherited from Gen Musharraf’s thinly disguised dictatorship to push Mr Sharif and his brother (governor of Punjab, Pakistan’s biggest province) out of politics, and is using the arbitrary powers he inherited to crack down on their protests.

While Pakistan is not about to fall to the Taliban, it is fraying at the edges. Ethnosectarian conflict between Sunni and Shia; insurgency in resource-rich but dirt-poor Baluchistan; an Islamist-tinged Pashtun rebellion in North-West Frontier province that has created an indigenous Taliban as well as a haven for al-Qaeda; and home-grown jihadis licensed to harry Indian forces in Kashmir that have now turned their guns on their erstwhile masters in Pakistan’s army – Pakistan burns while its purported rulers scrabble for scraps of power.

The US and its allies are not in a terribly strong position to influence them. Overinvested in their strongman’s ostensible support for the “war on terror”, they failed fully to register the advance of jihadi extremism under Gen Musharraf’s rule, or to develop real links with any institution except the army.
Yet Pakistan’s plight is so serious there must be a chance its politicians will – out of self-interest – stop playing with fire. Surely they can see that a new failure of civilian government will see the country resume an Islamist course under military tutelage – can’t they?
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

SOFT START!
Dawn Editorial
Friday, 13 Mar, 2009 | 08:54 AM PST |

Lawyers and activists of different political parties shout slogans for restoration of deposed judges and independence of judiciary during protest rally. — PPI

There’s many a slip ’twixt cup and lip. Heralded as a national long march for the restoration of the deposed judges, Thursday’s showing in Karachi and Quetta has cast doubts on the ‘national’ tag of the movement. In both provincial capitals no more than a few hundred lawyers gathered and support from the opposition parties was noticeably scarce. On the day, the largest gathering of protesters was in Lahore, from where the long march is not scheduled to kick off for another couple of days.

The lopsided turnout has raised some important questions. In recent weeks, the political upheaval in Punjab has given the long march added impetus, but the raison d’être of the long march is the restoration of the deposed judges. Can the movement be judged to reflect the national opinion if it draws its support predominantly from one province? Surely not.

Without downplaying the government’s role in letting the judicial crisis fester, in the build-up to the march we have noted that there are other grave national crises confronting the state. If the lawyers and their supporters wanted to raise the stakes in pressing their demands, they should have paid heed to the need for their movement to demonstrate a national face. Otherwise they ran the risk of appearing to put their narrow interests ahead of the broader national interest.

At the very least, the leaders of the lawyers’ movement and opposition political parties should have led from the front in Karachi and Quetta. But in quasi-farce scenes played out on television yesterday, at times it appeared that the hordes of cameramen and reporters easily outnumbered the protesters they were there to cover.

Now the long march is shaping up to be a struggle that pits Punjab against the centre, with the almost inevitable result it will be seen through the political prism of a straight fight between the PPP and the PML-N. For the apolitical supporters of the principle of an independent judiciary, that will not be the outcome they could have hoped for.

On its part, the government was again guilty of overreaction and an excessive use of force. More sensible hands would have recognised that the protesters in Karachi and Quetta represented little threat and were clearly not pushing for confrontation. Instead, the scenes of scuffles and mass detentions that played out in front of the cameras have added fuel to the perception that the government is nervous and edgy and can easily be goaded into making a catastrophic mistake.

What the government appears to have failed to understand is the nature of power. Electing its candidate as chairman of the Senate or having a secure majority in parliament can become irrelevant if it appears the government doesn’t believe it is in charge outside parliament.

Re: Chronicles Foretold - Lawyers' Movement Being Hijacked by the Right Wing by

[note] Thread starter is requested to please add his own comments, as per forum rules[/note]

Re: Chronicles Foretold - Lawyers’ Movement Being Hijacked by the Right Wing by

:yawn: