Supremacy of Constitution

Dr Raja Muhammad Khan

Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - In his statement of November 10, 2012, Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf categorically denied any sort of clash or confrontation between the state’s institution, particularly Pak Army and the superior judiciary; the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He said in his statement that, “there was no clash between the state’s institutions.” While giving this statement, he was clearly referring to the developments taken place in the last one week, after statements of Pakistani Army Chief and Chief Justice of Pakistan on November 5, 2012. The academic circle, the analysts and mature media men are of the opinion that, it was a mere coincidence that, Army Chief and Chief Justice addressed their respective audiences on the same day and contents of their statements were also released on the same day.

In both statements, there was nothing extra-ordinary said by both chiefs, which media projected as a likely clash or confrontation between the superior judiciary and the high command of Pak Army. Both chiefs emphasized on the supremacy of Pakistani Constitution and preeminence of law. Therefore, there was nothing wrong with the contents of the statements, except the perception and interpretation made by some of the media anchors and pseudo scholars and so-called analysts of national and international politics. The positive aspect is that, both the ruling and opposition parties have taken the statements in a positive spirit. Their interpretation of the statements was the supremacy of Constitution and additionally the Parliament is supreme over the institutions.

Analyzing the statement of General kayani; he boldly accepted the past mistakes, made by all institutions or individuals and stressed to take a re-start for a better future, free from the past mistakes. Recognizing the need of constructive criticism, he discarded the conspiracy theories which are based on rumours, unfounded information or intended disinformation to create ill will or to defame any institution may be; military or civilian. There can be no second thought that Pakistani armed forces draw their strength from the masses of the country, being national armed forces.

Therefore, those forces; domestic or international trying to draw wedges between people of Pakistan and its armed forces anyway are involved in a severe transgression, hence must abstain from doing that. Corollary to this, creating cracks and distinction between ‘leaders and the led’ is yet a bigger misdemeanor, hence cannot be tolerated. Looking at the contemporary armed forces, such acts are unbearable everywhere. How come, the head of an institution afford conspiracies against his institution and then commands that too? Harmony and concord among the rank and file of the armed forces is the most needed element.

The concept of “Esprit de corps” which promote a sense of shared fellowship, enthusiasm, and devotion to a cause among the members of armed forces is the hallmark of Pakistani armed forces. It is indeed the real strength of any army. Today, Pak Army is battling against an unpredictable enemy, who can attack at anytime, from anywhere and on anyone in Pakistan. Can Pakistan afford divided armed forces, lacking the trust and respect of masses? Any sensible Pakistani would say no to it. Conspiracy against armed forces of Pakistan, especially Pak Army is not new. Every time, the conspirants have been devising new modes and tactics to create a rift either; among its members or between masses and the Army. Army Chief had the moral responsibility to point out such ill designs, which he did on November 5, 2012. There was no point of exploiting these real and intimate concerns by the head of an institution.

Regarding the fixation of national interests, all responsible stake holders in Pakistan need to sit together for defining the national interests of the state of Pakistan, which are then, defended by armed forces at all means. Since Constitution of the country is supreme, therefore, anyone, who might have committed an offense, has to be dealt by the rule of law. For the blame of any retired member of armed forces, the institution can neither be held responsible nor should be defamed. Let the law to take care of those responsible for any wrong doers. The whole statement revolves around supremacy of the constitution and to avoid the weakening of institutions; military or civil and to stop campaign against the military as an institution.

In the address of Chief Justice, there was no rejection of Army or armed forces as an institution or undermining their roles. Rather he too was emphasizing on the supremacy of Constitution and the rule of law. His statement that, “missiles and tanks never guaranteed stability and security of a country” does not mean that they are not required. But upholding the international law would stop the nations from making use of such a dangerous option for the security and safety. Otherwise, Chief Justice fully understands that, global politics is essentially based on power politics, the idea propelled by the realist school of thought. There is no second thought that a country needs strong armed forces for its defense and security. How can Pakistan survive without its armed forces and strategic arsenals?

Therefore, instead of polluting the masses through misinterpretation and provoking institutions against each other by giving misleading statements, Pakistani media should play positive roles also. Rather spying GHQ, SC or at time Parliament, which benefits enemies of Pakistan only, they should concentrate on the real issues, facing the people of Pakistan. How many poor people are being killed in Karachi and Quetta on daily basis? Has our anchors really tried to expose those forces behind these killings and their real objectives? The real objectives are clear that, these killings are meant to destabilize Pakistan. Who is doing that and through whom, why media is hesitant to point out those. Indeed, the overnight rise of media without having gone through the evolutionary process of refinement and fixation of a clear code of conduct is more damaging the national image, rather making positive contributions. This aspect needs real attention.


—The writer is Islamabad based analyst of International Relations.