The Short Order (A shameful decision)
There is no doubt that Iftikhar Chaudhary has proved himself worse than Abdul Hameed Dogar, the reason is not that he acted upon the advice of military (just like Abdul Hameed Dogar and several past CJ), nor is the reason that he has proved to be coward in front of the mighty army. He is worse because unlike the past judges and Abdul Hameed Dogar, IMC owed his existence not to the military of Pakistan but to people of Pakistan and was given a due respect by the people of Pakistan. He betrayed people of Pakistan.
But this was not the reason for the outrage of people like Asma Jahangir, the primary reason for this outrage is the short order in this case. I have read numerous supreme court judgments and short orders, but none of them has been so shameful (including even the Dosso case (1958) judgement) as this one. This short order has put the whole judicial/constitutional achievements back to year 2000. All the good that was achieved by the November 3rd Judgement has been washed away by this short order.
The short order starts with mention of “Objective Resolution” (one of the most abused constitutional artifact by the military dictators) , the purpose of mentioning the Objective Resolution and the quoting the part that it “commands” is with malafide reasons to declare the “national security” as defined by the military establishment, above the fundamental rights of people of Pakistan. This short order will have very far reaching impact in the constitutional history of Pakistan, just like Dosso case had.
Besides the “Objective Resolution”, the short order mentions article 9, 14 and 19A. And in all three instances the short order stretches the definition of fundamental rights defined in these articles to absurd limits. Let me quote here all three articles here.
9. Security of person.
No person shall be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law.
14. Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.
(1) The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.
(2) No person shall be subjected to torture for the purpose of extracting evidence.
[19A. Right to information:
Every citizen shall have the right to have access to information in all matters of public importance subject to regulation and reasonable restrictions imposed by law.]
Now none of these articles are applicable in the actual case. The memo has not specifically taken the life of anybody in Pakistan, neither it has taken the liberty of any person.
No Aristotle can bring a logic that can explain the application of article 14 in this case.
Similarly the right to information has been stretched such absurd limits to ask for the conversation between the two entities of which one is even a foreign government.