 |
New Delhi, Nov. 3: The imposition of emergency in Pakistan is still an unfolding story with information flow severely restricted, but the developments become a little more comprehensible when compared with the events in India when Indira Gandhi was Prime Minister before losing in the 1977 elections.
Both Indian and Pakistani constitutions have provisions to impose emergency. But martial law in Pakistan — many fear such a possibility now — has an official extra-legal status since an order was given by General Zia-ul-Haq on July 5, 1977.
The Indian Constitution acknowledges the concept of martial law and grants immunity to security personnel in specific circumstances. It also allows Parliament to legislate on martial law but it is silent on the conditions under which martial law may be invoked.
The comparison can be extended beyond the constitutions of the two countries to the events in India between 1975 and 1977 and the developments in Pakistan tonight.
 |
| Protesters chant anti-Musharraf slogans near the general’s house in Islamabad. (AP) |
Like the ruler of Pakistan today, Indira Gandhi then was on collision course with the courts. Musharraf’s proclamation of emergency comes three days before a verdict from the Pakistan Supreme Court in the case challenging his right to contest elections as army chief and President.
A little more than 32 years ago, on June 12, 1975, Justice Sinha of Allahabad High Court found Indira Gandhi guilty of using illegal practices during the election campaign. She was ordered to vacate her seat in the Lok Sabha. On June 24, Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer granted a conditional stay on the court order but disallowed Indira Gandhi from participating in Parliament. On the night of June 25-26, she imposed the Emergency.
Thousands were arrested, newspapers were given censorship orders, the main Opposition leaders were detained and hundreds of them went into hiding. Justice Iyer wrote later that the Emergency was the Supreme Court’s “darkest hour”.
A Supreme Court bench upheld the legality of Indira Gandhi’s decision to impose the Emergency with one judge dissenting. Before the order in her favour, Indira Gandhi transferred and moved out several judges. That was still less than what Musharraf is doing in Islamabad. The army has been sent to the Supreme Court and is understood to be bodily removing its judges.
Justice Iyer writes: “Being unhappy about the right to vote (in Parliament), the indignant PM apparently wanted to silence criticism or upheaval of Opposition and in her myopic wisdom proclaimed Emergency, suspended fundamental rights and deprived judges of even the highest court the power to protect the citizen against official violence and violation.”
But Pakistan’s Supreme Court today has been less pusillanimous than its Indian counterpart then. It has set aside the order imposing emergency.
“This is the first time the Pakistan Supreme Court has shown teeth after it took the daring step of declaring the suspension of the chief justice illegal,” said T.R. Andhyarujina, constitutional expert and Pakistan watcher.
“It seemed that the Supreme Court was becoming docile in between, especially when it did not do anything about Nawaz Sharif being sent back. It had also initially refused to entertain a petition challenging Musharraf’s election,” he said.
Andhyarujina also explained that under Zia-ul-Haq’s July 5, 1977 order, Pakistan’s military ruler could order that normal civil law would be replaced by military law. In effect, the constitution could be suspended. Musharraf’s proclamation tonight was being closely monitored in New Delhi to understand the implications.
