So Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is getting ready to become a martyr to corruption. Facing a contempt case for not writing a letter to Swiss authorities that would revive a $60 million thievery case involving his party chief and President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, he told a seven-member Supreme Court bench on Monday that he had no intention to write the letter because the president enjoyed immunity - thus committing fresh contempt in the court's face.
He insisted in a written statement that it was for the Parliament rather than the Supreme Court to decide the issue of presidential immunity. In an earlier appearance before the court, Gilani had offered the explanation that he did not comply with its order because his advisers had counselled him otherwise. (Interestingly, former law minister and the President's blue-eyed boy, Babar Awan, is reported to have refused to sign an affidavit corroborating Prime Minister's stance, and has since been sidelined). Soon afterwards, he said at a public event that was he to write the letter he would have done that a long-time ago.
Which means he was not telling the truth when he claimed before the court that he had acted on the advice of his aides in deciding not to write the letter. In fact, we all know he was not going to do that if he wanted to keep his job. President Zardari himself had told a TV interviewer a while ago that his party had decided not to write the letter "come what may!"
Between them the two leaders have been making a mockery of the law and the Constitution, one saying the party's decision takes precedence over the apex court order and the other arguing Parliament, even the executive, rather than the Supreme Court had the right interpret the Constitution. Every student of political science knows that in a functioning democracy judiciary enjoys the sole prerogative to interpret constitution, not parliament, not the executive. Surely the Prime Minister and the President are aware of it, but it does not matter to them if their policy of defiance collides with the principles our Constitution enshrines. Their single-minded objective is to cover corruption, and in so doing create confusion.
Iterating at every available opportunity that there is no way he would comply with court orders, Gilani has been trying to deflect public attention from the real issue. He let out the truth, though, at a student gathering in Bahawalpur's Islamia University, saying "I cannot stab the President in the back." Why would it be a stab in the back, one would like to know, if he tells the Swiss authorities to let the law take its course in a money laundering case involving the President unless that could hurt the latter?
Morality of course is not an issue for the Prime Minister. In fact, during the course of his 'save the stolen money' campaign, he revealed what he thought of politics when he quoted an Urdu proverb 'koelon ki dalali mein mounh kala' (rough translation: one's face gets blackened while selling coal). In other words, politics is a dirty business. That says a lot about his sense of political morality. Gilani personally has little to lose from defying the court. The contempt case will take a while to reach culmination. Even if he gets six months it would be no big deal. He has served a much longer prison term in a corruption case. He could have never imagined becoming prime minister, and must be grateful to his party chief for it and willing to return the favour. He can enjoy the wealth acquired during his prime ministerial term, letting his older son step into his shoes.
More dangerously, in an attempt to turn one man issue into a confrontation between state institutions, he has been offering crude, nonsensical interpretations of the Constitution. If he wrote the letter, he told the students, that would be a violation of the Constitution and invite death sentence, while defiance of the court will get him in the slammer for only six months. This is as absurd a statement as can be. He has also been arguing that the case be referred to Parliament so it could decide presidential immunity, which of course is not Parliament domain. As for the case at issue, it needs to be recalled that when petitions challenging the NRO - a US-Britain brokered deal between PPP leader Benazir Bhutto and General Pervez Musharraf that led to withdrawal of the money laundering case - came up before it, the court had referred the NRO to Parliament, which failed to give its approval to that discriminatory law.
The court has shown extraordinary restraint in dealing with the issue, giving this government more than two years to implement its directions. The court of course will do what it deems appropriate. But the government attitude makes it plain it has no qualms about damaging the entire democratic edifice, if that is what it must take to keep the case closed.
It seems delay and obfuscation tactics are unlikely to help. Notably, the general impression has been that if the government manages to delay the letter, the case will cross the 15-year time limitation by the end of the next month, rendering futile any attempt to reopen the money laundering cases. In a recent interview a Swiss attorney, who represented Pakistan in those cases, told a local television channel that things are not so simple. According to him, if the assets unfrozen in 2008 as part of the NRO deal were moved elsewhere "then that's a new offence, and that's a new period of limitation." To put it differently, the 15-year limitation rule will not apply if the money has been moved out of Swiss banks. And earlier reports have been saying the money indeed is not where it sat before the NRO deal.
That brings us to Gilani's argument that even if he goes, the one who replaces him won't comply, either, with the court order. This far he is right. But then fresh elections are to be held, at the latest, by next March. It is almost certain that the new government will not be headed by the PPP or any of its current coalition partners. Whosoever comes in next is unlikely to have any hesitation to do the needful. The Zardari/Gilani government can delay the time of reckoning but, if the reports about the money having been moved elsewhere are true, it cannot be avoided. The letter will go out, come what may!
saida_fazal@yahoo.com