Judges are often appointed based on their loyalty to their establishment, rather than their ability or commitment to justice.
When talking about democracy, one of its important pillars is independent judiciary. This is a characteristic of governance that ensures national checks and balances. However, Pakistani judiciary has long been hidden by the ubiquitous and dominant force: the Pakistani army. This interference is a systematic issue that undermines not only recent phenomenon, but also domestic democratic values and institutions.
Take a step back and look at Pakistan’s judicial history. This will help you find patterns of judicial accomplice when legalizing military shopping. The doctrine of need, a notorious term in Pakistan’s judicial discourse, has been invoked several times to examine military coups. From the days of Ayub Khan to Pervez Musharraf, the judiciary often acted as a pilot in the army, imposing approval for actions that derailed democracy. The judge, who would have been the torchbearer of justice instead, became an instrument of authoritarianism. The failure of the judiciary to independence has been a dangerous precedent for future governments.
But it’s not just the past. The bondage of justice remains the same today. In a functioning democracy, the judiciary will hope to protect citizens’ rights and act as a breakwater against state overreach. But in Pakistan, reality is completely different. Judicial justice is often accused of selectively providing justice to succumb to the pressures of military facilities. Famous cases involving opponents, journalists, or political opponents are key examples of how judiciary can be manipulated to serve the interests of powerful people. The question is, how can democracy flourish when judiciary cannot or is unwilling to protect its core principles?
This subordination to the military has widespread consequences. It’s not just about silencing objections or affecting verdicts that favor the facility. The very legitimacy of the judicial system is at risk. Ordinary citizens lose faith in the judiciary when they see them bent over the will of those in uniform. When people don’t trust the courts, they resort to alternatives to resolve disputes, further destabilizing the country’s social structure.
Ironically, Pakistan’s constitution provides a robust framework for independent judiciary. The problem lies not in the law, but in its implementation. Judges are often appointed based on their loyalty to their establishment, rather than their ability or commitment to justice. This compromises judicial integrity from the start. Moreover, judges who dare to challenge military control face serious consequences, ranging from forced retirement to complete persecution. Recent cases of judiciary overreach and coercion only reinforce the notion that judiciary operates under the careful eyes of the military.
So let’s talk about the impact on democracy. When the judiciary is violated, it becomes impossible to maintain strong accountability. Military facilities already have a major impact on Pakistan’s politics and economy, will become virtually unruly. This creates a vicious cycle in which military control restrains democratic institutions, and weakening of justice cannot break this cycle. result? Only democracies with names in which the elected representatives have little real power, the military continues to pull the string from behind the scenes.
You might argue that the judiciary is not the only institution to blame Pakistan for its democratic misery. It’s true, but its role is undoubtedly important. Strong and independent judiciary could serve as a counterbalance to military influence. It can ensure that the law is applied equally, that the voices of marginalized people are heard and that the principles of justice are supported. But for this to happen, there is a need for systematic reform.
The first step is to isolate the judiciary from external pressure, especially from the military. Judges should be appointed on merit and their independence should be protected at any cost. The mechanisms of accountability must also be strengthened so that justice itself does not become a tool for oppression. Civil society also has a role to play. The defense of judicial independence must be relentless, and public opinion should pressure the judiciary to support constitutional responsibility.
International organizations and human rights groups can also contribute by monitoring Pakistan’s judicial practices and invoking cases of interference. The judiciary must make the person aware that their actions, or omissions, are being monitored and judged at a global stage. Coupled with internal reform, this external pressure could pave the way for justice and the judiciary that truly serves the interests of justice and democracy.
At the heart of this question is the fundamental question: what kind of Pakistan do those people imagine? If the goal is a democratic and fair society, independent judiciary cannot be negotiated. It is the judiciary that you must act as a guardian of the constitution. The path to achieving this vision is not easy. It requires courage, tenacity and collective effort from every segment of society.
Pakistani judiciary remains under the shadow of the military. This is a situation that poses a serious threat to the country’s democratic aspirations. This is not just an institutional issue. It is a matter of Pakistan’s future as a democracy. Breaking the military’s grip on the judiciary is not just a legal challenge, it is a moral obligation. The time to act is now. Pakistan cannot afford to leave its judiciary as a coagulation of democracy. Judgment is time to regain its legitimate role as guardian of justice and democracy for ccountry.
The author can be contacted at syedjahanzeeb2@gmail.com
