Judges of the Islamabad High Court have written an explosive letter alleging that Pakistan’s top intelligence agency pressured them to rule in favor of the country’s powerful military.
Highlighting cases of torture and kidnapping, the judges said they were forced to hear cases against former prime minister Imran Khan even after finding them unworthy of sentencing. Since the release of the letter, the Supreme Court has begun a case regarding the spy agency’s judicial interference, which is expected to resume hearing later this month.
Why I wrote this
Supreme Court justices are speaking out against military intervention at a critical time for Pakistan. Their courage, coupled with a public still seething over what appeared to be brazen election fraud, could be a sign that the military’s grip is weakening.
Pakistan’s military has historically relied on courts to justify its interventions in the political arena, including direct military takeovers and the overthrow of governments in opposition to the military’s high command. The current conflict comes amid mounting evidence that Pakistan’s elections were rigged at the behest of military authorities, presenting new challenges to the military’s hegemonic influence.
Referring to the military’s political interference, journalist Zebunisa Bourki said the letter “clearly lays out what can be called the ‘root of the roots’ of our problems.” “It turned whispers and closed-door discussions into public complaints.”
Pakistan’s political crisis has deepened as its powerful military is embroiled in a tense standoff with its superior judiciary.
Last month, six of the eight judges of the Islamabad High Court wrote an explosive letter alleging that the country’s top spy agency used coercive tactics to pressure judges to rule in their favor. . Highlighting cases of torture and kidnapping by these agencies, the judges were forced to hear the case against former Prime Minister Imran Khan even though they found that it did not meet the necessary legal provisions to merit a sentence. said that it was done.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan subsequently initiated litigation on the issue, asking bar associations and high courts across the country to submit proposals to counter the interference in the judiciary. Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, who has made a name for himself by opposing extra-constitutional military intervention, has vowed to join the front lines of defending judicial independence.
Why I wrote this
Supreme Court justices are speaking out against military intervention at a critical time for Pakistan. Their courage, coupled with a public still seething over what appeared to be brazen election fraud, could be a sign that the military’s grip is weakening.
Pakistan’s military has historically relied on courts to justify its intervention in the political arena. In the past, courts have justified direct military takeovers and helped overthrow political leaders who opposed the military high command. Experts say intelligence services interfered in judicial proceedings even when Khan was prime minister, before he lost support for the military.
The current standoff comes amid mounting evidence that Pakistan’s elections were rigged at the behest of military authorities, and the hegemonic influence of the military comes at a time when a flexible judiciary is needed to restrain Mr. Khan. This is a new challenge to power.
“The letter of the judges of the Islamabad High Court is important because it clearly reveals what can be called the “root root” of our problems,” says journalist Zebnisa Bourki, who argues that the military authorities’ political He mentioned puppet rule. “Is that unprecedented or surprising? Not so much in terms of content. …But the consequences of this letter were to turn whispers and backroom discussions into public grievances.” This means that it has been changed to .
Press Bureau/Reuters
The signatories claim they and their families were targeted by operatives of the country’s top intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency, after the court questioned the admissibility of the Tyrian Whyte case. . The lawsuit seeks to disqualify Mr. Khan from holding public office on the grounds that he hid from election documents the existence of a daughter who was not married to his mother. “One of the judges had to be hospitalized due to high blood pressure due to stress,” the letter states.
It was also claimed that surveillance equipment was found in one judge’s private lodging, and another judge’s relatives were taken away and tortured. The judges argued that there was a “continued policy carried out by intelligence operatives on the part of the national executive branch to intimidate judges and politically manipulate judicial outcomes under threat of coercion and extortion. It is essential to determine whether the existence of consequential problem. ”
Government and military leaders have not publicly addressed the letter’s allegations, but one intelligence official reportedly described them as “frivolous” and “taken out of context.”
Abdul Moiz Jaferi, a lawyer and political commentator, said the document does not necessarily mean open rebellion. He said Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz would not have been able to lead the government today without a submissive judiciary, as he came second in the general election despite receiving support from the military due to allegations of vote fraud. Point out. “The content of this letter is more detailed. [military] “The regime put more pressure than it could bear and broke the camel’s back,” he says.
Nevertheless, the judges’ defiance is adding to the pressure on Pakistan’s military. After the February 8 election, Pakistan’s military’s reputation has been severely tarnished after being accused of manipulating the results to prevent candidates from Mr. Khan’s party from forming a party. government.
The report released Tuesday by the Free and Fair Elections Network further claimed that poll watchers were prohibited from observing counting at 19 polling stations during the April 21 by-election. “The regime has been trying to get back on the front foot after months of turmoil,” said Michael Kugelman, director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute. “These allegations will galvanize critics who have accused them of overreach.”
All eyes are now on the Supreme Court, which is expected to resume hearing judicial intervention cases at the end of this month. “If the court takes a wishful middle ground position, we’re going to be in even more trouble than we started with,” Jaafferi said.
But some argue that regardless of the outcome of the trial, the judge’s defiance will have far-reaching implications for the military. This is the view of journalist Burki, who says the letter represents an indictment of the entire system.
“Once it’s typed out, once it’s printed, and now it’s been sentenced, it’s impossible to put the genie back in the bottle,” she says. “The more things are made public, the less fear remains.”
