When Antonio Gramsci, the renowned author of the Prison Notebooks and indeed a remarkably original thinker, gave us the term ‘civil society’, he made it quite distinct from what he termed ‘the political society’. While the former comprised of voluntary groups pertaining to everything apolitical, the latter was linked with the forces of coercion akin to politics. I am sure he never foresaw Pakistani civil society’s role that has indeed forgotten the useful analytic distinction between the two. Clearly the political activism of our civil society often ignores the consequences of its own actions.

But then I always had complaints about the poor reading habits of my fellow citizens. I vividly recall in the days of my youth – which incidentally are not over yet – during lectures and seminars someone would stand up and start calling civil society, erroneously of course, civilian society or civilised society, and we would sink in shame.

Shame is a useful commodity and so is memory. And since everyone these days is so obsessed with judicial activism, I want to take you to a trip down the memory lane. And as shameful and self-serving as it may seem, it is my memory that you will have to endure.

I was among the earliest journalists who protested in writing against Musharraf’s decision of sacking the incumbent chief justice. In my columns and through my website I kept churning out comments in support of the chief justice and the lawyers’ movement. So staunch was my faith that in my column titled, ‘A letter to Oxana’ (dated December 7, 2007), I wrote to my then 11-months old daughter: “And if my love, you ever come across Justice Iftikhar, Justice Bhagwandas, Justice Javed Iqbal, Aitzaz Ahsan and others who are standing with the people’s expectations, please hold your breath, lower your eyes and know that you are in the presence of greatness.”

But I also wrote, “When your father gained consciousness, a democratically elected prime minister who had promised hope to the poor had already been hanged through a conspiracy between foreign powers, a military ruler and others. I was too young to do or understand anything then, but I have always wondered why our elders tolerated this crime.” My respect for the apex courts and the people who worked for strengthening them has not changed. However, please notice that I had hoped in the very piece that the restored judiciary would stand for the protection of the elected representatives and democracy. It is in that bit of my dreams that today I am losing hope.

I definitely want an independent and thriving justice system. But I, simultaneously, want an even stronger democratic set up. But can democracy function when ministers and even the president are insulted on the media and in courts so openly, some unable to dispense their duties due to the exit control list (ECL)? Do not get me wrong. I am not saying that the accountability process should stop. Nor should the criticism of the government. But in the particular sector where victory is being proclaimed, prosecuting the civilian governments is not new. The very courts, after all, also hanged Zulfikar Bhutto.

I have absolutely no problem with the verdict. What else could we expect when the government did not even want to protect itself? Indeed the restraint exercised by the bench was commendable, with the only exception of advising the executive to replace certain officials in the accountability bureau. In the run up to the verdict many concerned friends from Sindh kept calling to ask if the rumours were true and the bench had ruled to unseat the president and the cabinet members. No attempt of that sort was mercifully made. What concerns me is the aggressive tone that the media and the courts have adopted. A minister being barred from an official foreign visit brought shame on to the country. Another minister was detained in the Lahore High Court for a bit. Lord, I had never dreamed that I would feel any sympathy for Rehman Malik, but it so happens that I do.

But coming back to the issues of shame, I have always believed that just like polio drops we need to administer shame drops in this country too. But unlike the polio vaccine the purpose of the shame vaccine would not be to cure shame but to induce it, for in our part of the world it is no longer a terminal disease. The need for this medicine has never been more desperate. I watch the television and I am told that the NRO was the blackest law in the country’s history. I beg to differ. It does not become a black law only because those who brought to us the 8th Amendment and the Hudood Ordinance say so. While it could be dubbed a discriminatory law, it had its strengths too. By establishing a cut off date for the amnesty it would have ensured that the incumbents did not indulge in any corruption in the future using the excuse of political victimisation. But that, dear readers, is in the past and we should address only the issue at hand, that is our future.

I have opined in the past that the Taliban apologists have used this debate to their advantage. If I was waiting for a sign I was not disappointed. After the verdict, the immunity of the president was challenged in the Lahore High Court by none other than Khalid Khawaja. If you expect me to say something further about the man who confesses to be Osama bin Laden’s pilot, then I am sorry to disappoint you. But you can always look him up on the internet. The incident of a known Taliban apologist in Khalid Khawaja seeking the president’s dismissal is something of a giveaway. As I had said earlier, they would like to drag down the government of every secular political party – and I include the PML-N in the list of secular ones too – and install a pro-Taliban regime in Islamabad. There is no need for me to explain how such an eventuality would mean only doom for the country’s moderate population. I wish everyone could understand what is at stake. Hence, instead of subjecting the country to one constitutional crisis after another it would be wise to wait till the war on terror is finished. If the democratic system takes root and the courts do function independently, I am sure the elections would decide who was corrupt and who was not. The system needs to function and attain stability.

Similarly, all institutions should define their boundaries and function within them. This is important because it is only through democracy that the people can change their future. I had said in the above-mentioned column that I am ready to die in the struggle for the independence of judiciary leading to a full democratic Pakistan. Just imagine how willing I must be as a citizen to protect the future of democracy in this country.

The writer is an independent columnist and a talk show host. He can be reached at farrukh.khan@pitafi.com
The column first appeared in Daily Times dated December 24, 2009