Pakistan: Dictatorship of the Bench and the Bar

[Zee]

Dictatorship of the Bench and the Bar
Pakistan:



Since November 2007 there has been a phenomenon of activism by the legal profession that has become known as the Lawyer's Movement.


I have long held the bleif that every individual has a right to propagate his/her ideas, opinions and beliefs as an individual.


I have also held the belief that all individuals have the inalienable right to associate themselves with different groupings.


I have not been able to understand the Lawyers' movement.


First of all, it is an on/off sort of thing. It becomes activated at certain times, then goes into hibernation, then wakes up again.


Ostensibly this movement sprang as a response to certain actions of the usurper Perwaiz Musharraf in exercise of the powers conferred upon him (Perwaiz Musharraf) not by his act of usurpation, but by a decision of the Pakistan Supreme Court. (usurpation NEVER confers any powers on anybody -the doctrine that occupancy of any position, in this case occupancy of state power, legitimizes actions is patently and inherently bad in law).


The entire judicial system and the entire legal profession had worked under those powers of Perwaiz Musharraf until November 2007.

They were rather amiss, waking up very late in the day, in November 2007.


That being what it is, more inexplicable is the leaning of the Lawyers and their apex professional body, the Supreme Court Bar Association, towards acts and actions that can only undermine the peoples sovereignty and concentrate political, administrative and legislative power, all in the hands of the judiciary.


Just as the dictatorship of the Turban and the Robe is abhorrent to democratic principles and practices, so is the dictatorship of the Bench and the Bar.


The Supreme Court Bar Association, through a rather convoluted and murky plan of action, seems to be aiming exactly for such a dictatorship.

[RUKHSANA]

It is up to us, the people of Pakistan, to resist such attempts.


I feel I will be staying on the topic when I say that as a nation, we are more of bystanders and spectators than active agents of change.


We have been looking on, as a nation, as vested interests have, over the country;s existence, slowly but surely eaten away into the fabric of society, corrupting and polluting every single facet of social existence.


The judicial profession is also one of vested interests.

[mchoudhary]

Judges, anyway, should be interpreting the law, not laying it down.

[Cheesed Off]

We hear a lot of talk of the Civil Society.



What the heck is it?

[powerless]

^


Basically, that is you and me.



And in our name, they are contemplating a ripp-off on us.

[RUKHSANA]

^


That is certainly true

[nauman]

Apr 1, 2010 9:34:03 GMT powerless said:

^


Basically, that is you and me.



And in our name, they are contemplating a ripp-off on us.

Well, I am not to take things lying down. I won't let that ripp off happen.


I will fight.

[indhakarachi]

Fight who and how?

[Zee]

^



The best way of fighting any attempt to foist an undemocratic dispensation on the country is to create and gain awareness, oneself, family, friends, colleagues. Discuss and debate issues, write to newspapers, phone in on talk shows, join forums such as this one, air your beliefs, defend them, try to win others to them.


Slowly, but surely, you will gain a critical mass of public opinion that will, in time, cause change to happen by translating thought into action.

[Haqnawaa]

Very interesting and apt topic, in tune with the times.


Judicial activism is all too good, but too much of any good thing can be bad.


Parliament, in any case, is the absolute sovereign in a democratic dispensation.