A BROKEN judicial system is always likely to attract novel, even unconstitutional, quasi-fixes.
With the superior judiciary and the legislative seemingly in denial about the need for root-and-branch overhaul of the judicial system, both state and society are finding alternatives that include parallel ‘judicial’ forums.
The 21st Amendment-created military courts are an ad hoc — and constitutionally ugly — response to the military’s anti-terrorism priorities.
Now, a questionable section of civil society is creating its own solutions.
As reported in this newspaper yesterday, Jamaatud Dawa has established fledgling ‘courts’ in its headquarters in Lahore, from where summonses are being sent to citizens by self-appointed judges and their assistants.
Of course, because this is JuD and perhaps because it is easier to do, the self-styled courts are operating under a religious veneer.
That particular trick appears to have worked as a senior Lahore police officer — tasked with fighting terrorism in the provincial capital — was quoted in this newspaper’s story claiming to have no knowledge of these new so-called courts, though he did suggest that the Punjab police would act if citizens were to approach them with complaints and/or evidence of the illegal and manifestly ill-intentioned courts.
Apparently, Punjab’s officialdom is too busy combating militancy to have the time to find and shut down illegal courts operating in the heart of the province.
Quite simply, the JuD experiment needs to be shut down immediately, with no caveats and no possibility of quiet resurrection once the furore dies down. In a preposterous world where such obvious principles need to be explained, it is easy enough to offer a straightforward refutation of the JuD’s official defence/explanation.
Arbitration services, especially in an institutionalised manner, cannot be provided by anyone who wants to.
While civil arbitration has found a niche in Pakistan in complex contractual disputes, the rules are internationally set, backed up by local law, and practitioners are duly licensed and accredited.
But even if JuD has predictably denied the claims, there is a problem with its official explanation — what is the scope of this so-called and thoroughly illegal arbitration?
Will the JuD courts — and they are styled as courts — hear any matter, criminal or civil?
But that is to wade into the thicket and examine the minutiae. No courts, none whatsoever, other than those constitutionally created by the state — that is the only principle that matters here.
The Lahore experiment needs to be shut down immediately.
Published in Dawn, April 8th, 2016
