02.06.2013 Views

ludUO

ludUO

ludUO

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

of citizens.<br />

In November some observations made<br />

by the army chief and the chief justice<br />

created a short-lived impression of tension<br />

between their institutions. Central to the<br />

controversy was General Kayani’s plea<br />

against unwarranted criticism of the armed<br />

forces and their commanders and his remark<br />

that no individual or institution had a<br />

monopoly to decide what was right or wrong<br />

in defining the ultimate national interest.<br />

Whether the General had the SC in mind was<br />

not clear but the Chief Justice probably<br />

thought he had and declared that the days<br />

when tanks and missiles guaranteed security<br />

had passed and the SC was the ultimate<br />

protector of the constitution. Further, when<br />

somebody referred to the army’s respect for<br />

the judiciary, the CJ said that it had already<br />

been witnessed the previous day.<br />

However, both sides exercised restraint<br />

and whatever the matter was it was not heard<br />

of again. Most probably it was realized that<br />

lawlessness in Balochistan, disappearances,<br />

or even occasional criticism of the military<br />

top brass, were not matters worth a tiff<br />

between the Big Two.<br />

As the hearings continued into the last<br />

month of the year the SC got extremely<br />

critical of the federal and provincial<br />

(Balochistan) governments for failing to<br />

restore order and for defying the court’s<br />

Their families waited for them<br />

in vain.<br />

orders. On December 05 it declared that the Balochistan government was<br />

ruling at its own risk and cost.<br />

In its interim order in the case regarding the law and order situation in<br />

Balochistan on December 12, 2012, the Supreme Court said the Balochistan<br />

government had lost the constitutional authority to govern the province and<br />

could not be allowed to continue as a silent spectator to the violation of<br />

fundamental rights.<br />

The court said it was the constitutional obligation of the federation to<br />

exercise all constitutional options to ensure that the fundamental rights of all<br />

people were fully protected but nothing had been done. The court believed<br />

that “even now it is the constitutional obligation (of the federation) under<br />

33<br />

State of Human Rights in 2012

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!