Democracy is not merely landing positions of pelf and power as a reward for electoral victory; it also obligates the victors to accept the responsibility for ensuring the rule of law and sanctity of fundamental rights.
No surprise then, that during the hearing of enforced disappearances on Wednesday, the Supreme Court made the stunning observation that the government's failure in recovering the missing persons tends to obtain 'a Gestapo-like reign of terror' in the country. "Anyone can just barge into someone's house to pick anyone," observed one of the judges.
And the incidence of kidnappings and forced disappearances remains unrelenting, even when we have a democratic set-up for the last two years. As to who are these kidnappers; not too infrequently, the names given carry prefixes like Brigadier or Major. What a shame for the government that the head of the bench hearing the case, Justice Javed Iqbal had to observe: "What kind of democracy is this where there is no respect for human rights...(as if) the entire system was on the verge of collapse. But there was always a hue and cry whenever there was an intervention by the court".
The judges clarified at the very outset that they were not talking of the disappeared that went missing, because they were abducted for ransom or held incommunicado because of personal enmity. The cases before the court concern those, unnumbered but believed to be in thousands, held in the underground dungeons or hidden safe houses by the intelligence agencies for any length of time.
Some 250 Pakistanis that General Pervez Musharraf handed over to the Americans for "millions of dollars" during the heady days of the anti-terrorism alliance, are also among the missing whose cases are before the apex court. So ironic is the situation that various government authorities have come up with differing figures, leaving the court with no other option but to ask human rights activist Asma Jehangir to come up with the number of people believed to have been taken away and not yet disclosed or returned by the agencies.
Accepted, in some cases the intelligence agencies need to question certain individuals. But there is sufficient law on the country's statute book to cater to this situation. Any person apprehended by the legally authorised agency needs to be produced before the court of law within a fixed period. It is also the detainee's fundamental right to be informed of the reason for his or her detention and seek legal assistance if required. But that has not been the case for over many years now. If Balochistan is in ferment today, it is mainly because of the authorities' diabolical silence over the truth in the matter. Even when the present government in Quetta has surrendered some, so many others still remain unaccounted for. Going by the figure given by the Balochistan home department, close to a thousand persons are missing. Only about a hundred have been traced and some brought before the courts or allowed to go home, but the rest remain missing.
It is hoped that the concerned authorities would recover them and produce before the courts, to prove wrong the separatists who claim that the Baloch are not getting fair treatment and equal rights.
The Supreme Court is absolutely right in saying that the question of missing persons is a far more serious challenge to democracy than issues such as the NRO. The NRO essentially concerns some politicians and a few, retired bureaucrats but the issue of missing persons is much wider in application as it has a direct bearing on the constitutional rights of the people, the reputation of armed forces and the country's territorial integrity. It has lingered on unresolved to the shame of our democratic protestations. Now, a way out of the nightmarish situation has been proposed by Asma Jehangir - that let there be a judicial commission to look into the issue and propose remedial measures. The apex court seems to be agreeable to this proposal, evident as it was when the judges asked her to prepare the list of the missing, whom she wanted to be adjudged by a special commission.
Comments
Comments are closed.