Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is the most trusted man in Pakistan, according to polls. He has gained support for taking on Pakistan's unpopular president Asif Ali Zardari. A February 12 article in The Economist discusses concerns that the type of political activism shown by Chaudhry and the high court might be undermining Pakistan's fragile democracy.Criminal proceedings against a sitting president are illegal in Pakistan, but Chaudhry has tried to get Swiss officials to reopen a corruption case against Zardari and he has gone after the president on technicalities. Populist causes have been quickly adopted. The Court recently ruled that an American diplomat accused of shooting two men to death in Lahore cannot leave the country, and he has ruled in favor of the controversial blasphemy laws. Chaudhry has lashed out at the IMF for its policies in dealing with poor countries. In the past, the courts have tried to fix the price of commodities. These positions and rulings suggest an attempt to gain public favor.
The courts have resisted political oversight and seem to have army support. The concern is that this may set the stage for a return of military rule in Pakistan.
Our discussion in class has included the importance of an independent judiciary. Is it possible for a judiciary to be too independent? We have a distaste in our country for judges who act like politicians, and both sides of the political spectrum rail against judicial activism. In a fragile democracy like Pakistan the balance of power can be easily upset, with potentially harmful results for the country.
