The prime minister, clearly, cannot stomach the supreme court’s recent judgment. Ms Bhutto’s speech in parliament two weeks ago was defiant, caustic, even contemptuous. She feels done in and she wants to hit back. Is this wise?
Ms Bhutto has trotted out a list of complaints against the judiciary in general and the recent judgment in particular. Most of her arguments, to be fair to her, are quite reasonable — the judiciary hasn’t exactly been a paragon of virtue, consistency, good faith or political neutrality. The gist of what she is saying is this: PPP governments have been, and remain, a victim of the establishment’s double standards. What’s sauce for the goose isn’t sauce for the gander.
Granted that this may be true, does it follow that the prime minister should vent her outrage by demanding that the chief justice should be fired? If, as she alleges, the judges have judged in “anger”, should she pay them back in the same coin? The ‘loyalists’ beseiging her are not her friends. They only say what she wants to hear, rather than what she needs to know. By stoking the fire in her belly, they are leading her to a dangerous precipice.
This is what Ms Bhutto needs to be told:
1. “Yes, prime minister, the judiciary is being bloody-minded. This is partly because of historical reasons. But it’s also because we’ve treated it shabbily. At any rate, even a cursory analysis of what it means to take the judges on in their current mood reveals many hidden costs and few tangible benefits. Would the prime minister, for example, care to consider the implications of a restoration of Mian Manzoor Wattoo’s government in the Punjab? Is the government ready to answer awkward questions in court about a couple of dubious privatisation deals? Does she want her revised electoral rolls to be successfully challenged? Would her Attorney-General like the courts to review the powers of the prime minister vis a vis the president over appointments to the judiciary? Is she ready to hold local body polls immediately? Does she want to push the supreme court into ordering the FIA and IB to investigate political corruption in government? And so on.
2. “Yes, prime minister, President Farooq Leghari appears to have become a bit disloyal of late. This is partly because of the intrinsic nature of the office of the head of state which has come to abhor ‘jiyala-ism’. (Even if the good Professor N D Khan had been sitting in the Presidency, he would have had occasion to say ‘Nothing Doing, Prime Minister’!) But it is also because you and your spouse continue to rub him up the wrong way. The fact is that Mr Leghari is still your best friend even though you are fast becoming your own worst enemy. If things carry on like this, all your enemies have to do is to sit back and enjoy the show while you foolishly go about driving a wedge between yourself and the president.
3. “Yes, prime minister, you are the head of a fairly elected government which enjoys a parliamentary majority. In theory, therefore, your word should be law. But it isn’t so any longer because you and your spouse have wittingly eroded the moral legitimacy of your government by various acts of commission and omission. Therefore most people are inclined to believe the worst of you. The tragedy is that even when you are right or innocent, few are prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt.”
Ms Bhutto’s problem is that she has lost sight of the wood for the trees. She is trapped in a web of sham and incompetence spun by an army of sycophants. Arrogant by nature, mercurial by inclination, suspicious by experience and manipulative by temperament, she has increasingly isolated herself by alienating many people and institutions. If she continues in her reckless ways, it is difficult to predict a safe passage for her in time to come. But all may not yet be lost.
Ms Bhutto should swallow her pride, anger and hurt and quickly compromise with the chief justice like a good politician. There is absolutely no point in thundering about the injustice of the judges or the inconsistency of their judgments. Nor is there anything to be gained from ticking off their personal failings or leaking stories about their behaviour. The judges are in the driving seat at the moment and there is nothing Ms Bhutto can do about it without triggering a fatal accident to her government.
The prime minister must also treat the presidency with the respect and sensitivity it deserves. President Leghari, as we have said time and again, is a good man devoted to democracy and clean government. He is now under tremendous pressure to prove his bonafides as a neutral head of state. If Ms Bhutto spurns his advice or insults his integrity, she will push him into a corner from where there may be no retreat.
Tread carefully, Ms Bhutto. You cannot chew broken bottles with your teeth and expect not to get hurt.