ISLAMABAD: If the trend of toppling governments through agitation becomes the norm, the Supreme Court fears, civil war and chaos may reign in the country.

“There would be chaos and civil war in the country if this trend of mobilising crowd to unseat the government of the day catches on,” observed Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali who is one of five judges on the Supreme Court bench — headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk — that heard identical petitions seeking to prevent extra-constitutional steps in the wake of the ongoing sit-ins.

The judge also made it clear that Supreme Court judges were not claiming any special privilege for themselves, but securing the rights of ordinary citizens, the staff of the Supreme Court as well as the lawyers that came to the court every day.

The court, he said, was awash with complaints — even from those in uniform — who claimed they were subjected to body searches and asked to prove their identities by workers of the Pakistan Awami Tehreek and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf who were blocking Constitution Avenue.

Justice Khosa says case not about Constitution Avenue, but the Constitution itself

“This case is not about one particular road,” Justice Asif Saeed Khosa intervened, observing that this was a matter of the Constitution itself and of perceived threats to it.

In a lighter vein, the judge referred to the possibility of martial law, saying it was akin to an orthopaedic surgeon who wanted to perform brain surgery, which has already failed four times.

But the petitioner was insistent that the Supreme Court restrain them from operating.

Justice Saqib Nisar made a passionate appeal, saying that the Constitution must be preserved for posterity.

The judge also recalled that things had changed in the aftermath of the apex court’s July 31 judgment, that declared the November 3, 2007 emergency illegal. The judgment also introduced a new line in the Code of Conduct for superior court judges, stipulating that no judge could support any functionary who tried to acquire power through extra-constitutional means.

The judge — referring to the famous Bush VS Gore case from the year 2000 — said that political laundry should not be washed in court and vowed that the independence of the judiciary would never be compromised.

On Wednesday, Hamid Khan appeared on behalf of PTI and asked the court to exercise its powers and take suo motu action to end the impasse.

He was referring to the request regarding the formation of a judicial commission to inquire into alleged rigging in the 2013 elections.

But Justice Khosa suggested that instead of asking for suo motu action, they should file a petition instead.

PAT attorney Ali Zafar assured the court that he would also like to see the wishes of the court honoured, but the real inconvenience for the people of Islamabad was the blockade of key roads with containers.

The counsel assured the court PAT would not stop the free movement of vehicles and would clear one side of Constitution Avenue to allow access to Parliament House and the Supreme Court.

The chief justice observed that the PAT reply made it seem as if the party leadership was not fully in control of its workers.

Published in Dawn, August 28th, 2014