Why should families of calamity struck victims have to depend upon the interdiction of a benevolent overseer, rather than their birth-right to access the legal system?
Though the conclusion of the Supreme Court on the Contempt of Court Act was a predictable one, the reasoning by which it came about raises many questions.
A viable procedure needs to be formulated which assures that all superior court decisions are free of influence from both the ‘Public’ and the ‘Private’ sphere.
There is hesitancy within the legal community to confront the notion that the judiciary’s actions may no longer carry with it the consent of the Pakistani public.
The sparse amount of thought put into developing a legal basis for the suo motu procedure is reflective of the manner in which it is understood by legal practitioners.
The Pakistani public feels entitled to question and comment on judicial determinations made by the apex court – and the point is not lost on the court itself.