I have been a very poor student of the computer. But one lesson that I learned was that if one commits a mistake one has to “undo it” How you do it in Administrative and management matters is a different matter, never by the tip of the finger. You have to do it gracefully, with dignity, slowly, even there treating it as a matter of guidance and leadership. What is not to be repeated is as follows
- Raising the pay of its own employees without looking to the law limiting that power. The Commando CEO Gen Musharaf looked the other way because in spite of having Abraham Lincoln’ letter of approval in his briefcase, he was till then desperately looking for his own legitimacy. What followed was a chaos in the governance structure of the country Every head of Department considering himself a man of some substance, as everyone does now, raised the pay and rewards of his own employees, always and delightfully citing the example of the Supreme Court. As I read in the newspaper even the High Court did it and the Supreme Court had to set it aside. Take stock of the extent to which and which sectors have got affected, ensure that no more than a sort of illegalities continue to be committed in the name and as an example of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
- Denying the annual audit of its own accounts on a ground transparently untenable and illegal. For future allocations, the Parliament has the right to know what is the competence, the performance, and responsibility exhibited by those handling the finances of the country. Take a stock of the extent of damage done, control its future unauthorized use,, a tool of defense and protection. Parliament can overcome such defiance by making it a practice that anyone obliged but refusing audit will have annually the grant reduced by 2% bringing it down to bare bones. It will be a tremendous cut, no new expenditure, old budget reduced by 2%. The strength of an institution lies and lies only in Civil Society, not in competition with other institutions.
- A case of misappropriation of millions of rupees had taken place in the detection of which the Court has played no part at all. Notwithstanding the pendency of court cases, an administrative inquiry could take place to remove the causes of such failures and to effect recoveries not selectively but completely and from all. The report, if any should have been made public, fully or at least material part of it.
- In advancing the concept of complete justice the controlling features of Articles, 175(2), Article 187 (2) of the Constitution and its own precedent in PLJ 1974 SC 25 at 34 should not be kept on the back burner. All others should also be required to observe it thoroughly understanding the rationale and scope of it.
- The magisterial control over the Police administration should not have been allowed to pass in the hands of those who always couple it with their personal advancement, political advancement or self-serving orthodoxy, a hybrid difficult to identify and uncontrollable in nature.
- Seeing how effectively the SC is exercising its suo motu jurisdiction, as if ready to take over the entire country, the High Courts have started doing the same without even noticing any of the earlier precedents that there must be an aggrieved person, there must be an active dispute between the parties, the alternative remedy has been availed of, and if no effective alternative forum is established the Administrative departments should be coerced to provide it , the Ombudsman having miserably failed in getting it
- The judges are expected and required to do brain work and not leg work. If they do not keep that distance Montesquieu ‘s observations will prevail “of the three powers above mentioned, the judiciary is next to nothing” (spirit of laws Vol.1 Page186) Martin Mayer the judges. P393 “ Unless some basic problems are considered and solved our judicial branch will become increasingly faceless and anonymous
Finally, the following from US Justice Sandra Day O’Connor “Politics is threatening the rule of law in the US today. How to save our courts.
“Now, as a private citizen, I am anxious about the state of Judiciary in America. — Our judicial system has safeguards to ensure consistency and preservation of the law. But it is threatened when judges ignore settled law and make decisions according to personal or public preferences. The judiciary currently is experiencing unprecedented pressure from interest groups to make decisions that are based on politics. ——–Political pressure is a big problem in a number of our state courts. More than 89% of state judges go through some form of the election process. Many of these elections recently have become full-fledged political battles, fueled by growing sums of money spent by candidates and special interest groups to attack, defend and counterattack. ——The most expensive judicial election in American history in 2004 cost $ 9.3 million, to the candidates, a sum greater than what was spent in more than half of the US Senate race that year. ——– The winner Lloyd Karmeier, said of the money “ that’s obscene for a judicial race. What does it gain people? How can anyone have faith in the system? ———Judges should write their opinions in plain English so that the public can understand what the law is.”
Experiences of a Lifetime 