Interview with a Future Leader
Ather Minallah and the Dharna Myth
By Mohammad Ashraf Chaudhry
Pittsburg, CA
I met Ather after 34 years. He used to be an important student leader of the Students’ Union of which I was the Patron in-charge. Spotting his face on the TV as a veritable spokesman for the deposed justices and for democracy, explaining to the people the true law of the country and its blatant violation, especially with regard to the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, by a military dictator, it was but natural for me to feel the urge to see this budding future leader of Pakistan during my visit to Pakistan in December, 2008. And I met him on January 15, 2009 at noon time, for a get-together, or say for an interview.
It was not hard for me to remember how Ather in the mid-seventies distinguished himself as a student leader, by not being rude and defiant and stubborn, but by staying firm, clear-headed and articulate all the time. I recollect vividly how vociferous, not boisterous, he often used to become while pleading for the student demands, and how hard it used to be for me to just listen and shelve those demands for a future time with a beguiling promise. Sandwiched between the cajoling, but empty commitments of the Principal and the impetuous thrust of the student leaders, my job, I remember, used to be to learn how best to walk on the razor edge, resulting often in pleasing none in the end. I must admit, Ather used to be patient because he was a different brand. I remembered - as I read his name in the newspapers during this visit - one President of our students’ union, currently embroiled in a controversy in his capacity as Director General of a certain department in Islamabad, once comparing the Principal of the college to “a whore who does not change her bed-sheets as frequently as he, the Principal, does change his words”. What an analogy! The gentleman belonged to a religiously led political party. Ather was different. He used to be forceful without being disrespectful; articulate without being nonsensical.
Why Justice Is So Important in Pakistan
How does Islam rank Justice (Adl)? In the Islamic perspective, justice receives such prominence in the Qur’an that scholars unanimously agree that it is one reason that God created the earth. God made accountability not an option, but a compulsion, something mandatory, and hence our belief in the Day of Judgment: “And We have created the heavens and the earth in Truth so that every soul may earn its just recompense for what it earned and that it may not be oppressed” 45:22. So much for the Mullahs and Muftis who in the past provided longevity to the life-line of dictators who fiddled with Justice and its process by treating the constitution of the country as if it were a piece of toilet paper, by disfiguring the very face of Justice through the induction of “grateful justices” in the Apex court of the country.
In the world comity, it is an established fact now that only those nations have survived, prospered and developed that have held on to the rule of justice and fair-play in their governance. Thomas Jefferson, the third president of America, who drafted the Declaration of Independence then laid it down in clear words that “to provide justice, is the most sacred of the duties of government. No purpose, no goal of public policy, can be of greater importance in a democracy”
Chief Justice Marshall’s powerful verdict of 1803 in the case of Marbury Vs Madison, reflects the kind of judicial quagmire in which our country, Pakistan, is currently embroiled, i.e. who is supreme and more important, an independent judiciary or the legislative body, (parliament)? His verdict became a foundation for the judicial branch’s key role in the development of the American system of government. Chief Justice Marshall wrote, “First, theConstitution is by its own terms, the Supreme Law of the land. Second, all legislative acts and other actions of government are subordinate to the Supreme Law, and cannot be allowed to conflict with it; and third, judges are sworn to enforce the provisions of the Constitution, and therefore, must refuse to enforce any government action they find to be in conflict with it. Supreme Court has the right to declare acts of Congressunconstitutional”.And the world saw that America prospered.
INTERVIEW
Q. Between the rule of law, independent judiciary and the restoration of Chief Justice what, in your opinion, is more urgent and important under the present circumstances?
A: It is a misnomer to use the term, restoration, for the Chief Justice. He is still the CJ of Pakistan. We are human beings and not angels. Mistakes have been made in the past by all. But the event of 9 th of March stands singular. On this day the judicial murder of the Constitution took place. On this day the constitution came under attack, like never before.
As a professional man, I have no interest in the Bar politics. I know Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry only when I would appear in his court. But the 9 th March event made me feel degraded in my own eyes. I feel myself humbled and humiliated beyond repair as a citizen of Pakistan. If I stand by the Chief Justice now, it is more so, for being an act of paying back what I owe to the country. That day of March 9 gave me an opportunity to rethink/realize that Pakistan has to change if it has to survive… change to get out of the mess, and stand out as a respectful and respected nation. And we believe that we can bring about that change. The difficulties are tough, but not insurmountable.
Every nation that has a functional mode of good governance, for instance, has a firm system of accountability; has rules of law, and it also must be seen making some visible efforts to control corruption in institutions where decisions are made. In such a nation institutions where decision are made are well identified and defined in the Constitution. Unfortunately such institutions in Pakistan have been missing in the last 62 years of its existence.
It is, thus, the 9 th of March event when he, the Chief Justice, Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, single-handedly stood up without thinking of any consequences. He challenged the elitist ruling class, and that is how the struggle started. It was perhaps the power of the 20 th of July, (when a full 13-member bench of the Supreme court reinstated Chief Justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, and which event sparkled a chain of jubilant celebrations through the country), but it was also a fact that the Supreme Court now was under pressure to do the right thing and block the law of necessity. But the dictatorial forces struck again on the 3 rd of November, 2007.
It was not the removal of one man, but the removal of the supreme law-man of the country. It was the first time that the Supreme Court stood up, and passed the order the same day, suspending the PCO. The struggle is not just for the reinstatement of the CJ; it is symbolic of something far greater to me. It is against the resistance of the elitist and the ruling class who refuse to accept the will of the people of Pakistan. Therefore, to me, the entire struggle had been to uphold the ruling and the sanctity of July 20 verdict, and to offer resistance against providing sanctity to November 3 act in which an emergency was imposed. The restoration of CJ is just the consequence of that. It is a question of principles, a question of holding those accountable who are selfish and who have dishonored the people of Pakistan, and who have brought the country to its present state. It is a struggle to ensure that in future no one ever dares to disturb the Constitution which is a tool of administering Justice, and which provides protection to the people.
Yesterday, a European journalist, interested in knowing how the cases related to corruption are being dealt with in the courts of Pakistan. Without a political will on the part of the State, even an ideal law and court become irrelevant. For me, the biggest act of corruption has been the promulgation of the NRO. You may ask me, why? There were cases in which people were convicted. It is an established fact that 40 million rupees were recovered from the locker of one person (name not mentioned), and from another locker, some 20 million rupees. And they all became beneficiaries of the NRO, and today the same people are holding public offices. Millions of rupees of tax payers’ money were spent in investigating these cases.
Remember, General Musharraf took over with one point agenda… to introduce accountability and rid the country of corruption. And he was received by the people of Pakistan, notwithstanding his taking over the country. When he became weak, and he wanted support, he begged his supporters from abroad to broker a deal with Ms. Benazir. Only weeks before, he had made commitments through interviews that he would not allow Ms. Benazir and Mian Nawaz Sharif to step on the soil of Pakistan.
Today, the nation holds no secret that the US administration and the British High Commissioner brokered that deal and Musharraf became a major partner in that deal. He misused his powers as President for his personal gains, and he issued the NROs, giving a blanket cover, which act is unprecedented, just to cover all the corruption cases pending in the courts of Pakistan and abroad. This is the highest crime the Head of a country could commit in his own country.
As a Pakistani, my head hung in shame when after the NRO, the Attorney General of Pakistan, Malik Qayyum appeared in the Swiss court, pleading innocence on behalf of Asif Ali Zardari. The dilemma is that it was Malik Qayyum who as a judge of High Court, had convicted him. I felt, it was the worst attack on my beloved country.
Q. What about the cases decided by courts after the act of March 9, 2007? Some scars, some vestiges of damage still will stay. You can’t have the judiciary as it was on March 8, or November, 2. How do you reconcile to this?
A: I have not appeared in any court. If the reversal does not take place, and those who are responsible for the mess are not tried, then there can never be an independent judiciary in the next 100 years. In the absence of accountability, no judge will dare to conflict the forces that rule. There will be no independent judiciary, or court - all will act under fear. So an independent Judiciary is of great importance for the very existence of this country.
CJ, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry has been appreciated in his struggle by the judges of the US Supreme Court. Judge Stephen F. Boyd called him “A role model for judges all across the globe and even for the US for upholding the rule of law”. Harvard Law School in its 360 years of history, honored CJ for his struggle for upholding the rule of law, and equality. He had been third to receive this honor, the other two being Nelson Mandela and Justice Marshall Thurmond.
Q: Aitzaz Ahsan was once hailed as ‘People’s Hero’ in 2007, but not so in the year 2008. Some attribute his fall to his call for not having a dharna (sit-in) after the lawyers successful long march. Do you agree with this perception?
A: He is the only person who has challenged the policies of President Asif Ali Zardari openly and publicly. But as a civilized leader, his language remains decent. It is a part of record that people (who are close to Zardari now) are responsible for bringing down Aitzaz, because they know Aitzaz is the only hurdle in their way.
The question is: why CJ, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, has not abandoned him, if that were the case as you have hinted in your question? The CJ still believes in the integrity of Aitzaz because he is aware of the reality. And the reality is that Aitzaz is, has been, and will remain the genius, the visionary behind the lawyers’ movement; without him the movement would not have reached this stage. The reality is also known to the elitist ruling class, and to those forces who now are the beneficiaries of this movement, or to those who want to hijack the movement. Aitzaz is the most open critic of his own party’s leadership.
THE DHARNA MYTH: All those forces that want to hijack the movement are pouncing upon Aitzaz. The world saw the live coverage of that march. The fact is that the march which started on June 9 in Multan ended in Islamabad. Regarding Dharna, Aitzaz was the last speaker before Muneer Malik. Mr. Malik in his speech had said unequivocally that there would be no Dharna. Peshawar Bar leader Mr. Abdul Latif Afridi, Mr. Anwar Kundi of Lahore Bar Association,Mr. Baz Muhammad Kakar of Baluchistan Bar, Hadi Shakil Ahmed of Quetta High Court Bar, Mr. Rashid Rizvi of Karachi H. C. Bar, to name only a few, they all spoke and they all said that there would be no dharna. Mr. Hamid Khan also spoke; neither he contradicted any of these speakers, nor did he mention in his speech anything about dharna.
Why Aitzaz then? I will speak the truth at an appropriate time, and will stay silent just for the sake of the movement. My lips are sealed. The question is: who were the people who went behind the stage with the intention of creating violence, a fact that can be verified? It was on the call and trust of Aitzaz that people had brought their families and children with them. Their security and their wellbeing was the responsibility of the leadership, rather than acceding to the people who wanted to create violence. They were the people who wanted to hijack the Parliament, which has not been the aim and objective of the movement. This can be verified from the record. My lips are sealed. I am not an agent of any lawyer leader. I am a part of this movement. A day will come when people will know who damaged the movement.”
Aitzaz is the only one who lost most, and who has substantially suffered economically as well. He has refused to appear in any court. He has returned hefty fees. He did not bow down to the present PCO courts.”
Q: Don’t you think that the strength of the Lawyer’s Movement has abated somewhat, and it has lost some of its relevance and vigor when viewed in the current developments and circumstances?
A: I feel the same sometimes. Yes, bigger events have taken place, but they have not diminished the spirit of the lawyers’ movement. It is a movement of the young lawyers, of their idealism, which is their strength and foundation. It is through this movement that a great awareness in the people of Pakistan has taken place, particularly outside the country. People now understand that in the absence of rule of law and justice, it is the forces of extremism and terrorism that become the beneficiaries. Citizens lose their faith in the State institutions, as they feel that they don’t have any stake in the system. They begin to look for security in the brute forces that administer ready and rough justice.”
The interview stretched well over an hour. It was really a pleasure to meet this future leader of Pakistan who appeared so committed and so sincere in his actions and pronouncements. He is right in his estimation of Aitzaz. Foreign Policy magazine in its July/August, 08 issue includes Aitzaz in the list of the “World’s Top 20 Public Intellectuals”, and places Aitzaz at number five, and this is an honor for Pakistan. Herald of January, 2009 remembers him in such words, “Refusing to cozy up to President Asif Ali Zardari and to offer the unflinching loyalty that he expects, Ahsan, a PPP veteran and former minister, did not fight a by-election in the summer, opting instead to hold firm with the cause he is both championing and symbolizing”.
Much is made of how once CJ Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry also took oath under PCO. Well! Once the Founding Father of Pakistan also was the president of Congress; Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Independence, once had said that the Colonies should remain loyal to the King. The same Jefferson in a booklet now was writing that the British Parliament had no right to pass laws for the Colonies. The same Jefferson wrote such golden words: “All human beings have an inalienable right to life, liberty and to the pursuit of happiness,” and “All men are created equal… all men have the right to equal rights and equal opportunities”, but would it not sound as a sort of contradiction when we think that he and other Founding Fathers of America owned slaves too. Rights of women did not figure out much in those ‘inalienable rights.’
Looking at the ground realities of 1775, and the idealism of these great men, John Dickinson of Delaware correctly remembered the words of a British officer, who spoke to him after the Colonists had won the war for Independence. “These United States will not last”. Already the original 13 States, brought together through this friendly document stood divided and engaged in hectic arguments over the issues of slavery, voting rights, claims to Western lands, besides the religious polarization. Already the writers of this document had declared as barred from holding any public office such people as “Jews, Roman Catholics, Moors (Muslims), and Atheists”. If American history makes any sense to any developing country like Pakistan, then I must say the effort is worth the labor. There are many a landmark in its history that can show us the way to wiggle out of our self-created pool of mess. Following the rule of law and Justice for all is one sure way to prosperity and stability. Islam and America both say so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
