The armed forces and General Raheel Sharif are riding a notable wave of public sympathy, confidence and admiration since the Peshawar tragedy.

A desperate population is anxious to grab at any semblance of leadership and resolve. Then there are the determined, head-scratching politicians, looking for the exit route in Pakistan’s maze of terror.

General Sharif’s quick-fire trip to Afghanistan and immediate military retaliation is currently providing the solution to the first deficiency.

The deployment of 10,000 army personnel to counter terrorism in our cities is the grudnorm to the second.

That we have vacated such vast public space to the armed forces begs that obscure question again about the army, the government and the Constitution.

There was a deafening silence in the Constitution of Pakistan of 1956 and 1962 about the role of the armed forces and the events over that period taught the country some harsh lessons about the power of silence.

The PPP government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto recognised the danger of this omission and tackled the issue head-on by inserting, highlighting and then underlining that the armed forces would be subservient to the government.

In his speech on the passing of the 1973 Constitution, the Law Minister, Mr Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, emphatically rang aloud the words of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in the House:

“With the making of the Constitution, the course of Martial Laws, the apprehensions of taking control of the country by usurpers and dictators and exploiters shall be buried once and for all.”

Enter Articles 243, 244 and 245 of the 1973 Constitution

Article 243(1) of the Constitution is sacrosanct:

“The Federal Government shall have control and command of the Armed Forces.” Article 245(1) follows on: “The Armed Forces shall, under the directions of the Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war, and, subject to law, act in aid of civil power when called upon to do so.”

The constitutional role of the armed forces is thus two-fold. The first, fairly obvious, traditional one is to defend Pakistan.

The second, perhaps more significant in our history, is to assist the government when so called upon.

Take a look: Army to be withdrawn from 3 provinces if Article 245 not invoked, says Nisar

Ostensibly, this second function appears to be premised on the notion that the armed forces possess a capability which the federal government doesn’t, and which it, at some stage, may need.

In 1999, the Supreme Court observed that this clause essentially permitted the federal government to call upon the armed forces to perform police functions, for suppressing riots, maintaining law and order and also for assistance in natural calamities.

However, our superior courts have repeatedly stressed that Article 245 only gives limited authority to the armed forces in this respect, i.e. to act in aid of civil power – not supplant it, nor efface it. This is established precedent and is highly unlikely to budge with our resurgent judiciary. Even in the post-Iftikhar Chaudhry phase, the possibility that Article 245, in of itself, presents an opportunity to wrestle power away from the federation is somewhere between slim and none.

There is but another unforgettable tale.

After suffering heavy losses in the general elections of 1977, the Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) cried foul and vigorously protested that the elections had been massively rigged by the PPP. The PNA called for general strikes throughout the country and violence erupted. The police and the notorious Federal Security Force of the time failed to curb the demonstrations.

Left with little alternative and one month into the campaign, the federal government directed the armed forces to act in aid of the provincial governments of Sindh and Punjab under Article 245. This was April 21, 1977. By July 5, 1977, there was no government and no Article 245, only a Chief Martial Law Administrator.

Examine: Military courts could have been avoided

Albeit eerily familiar, the events in 1977 shouldn’t be taken in isolation. Much has happened since. Some more martial law, some more democracy. The armed forces have been called to act in aid of constitutional organs on several occasions and have done so without clipping civilian power, be it for relief work after earthquakes and monsoon or in the conduct of elections.

There is a broad consensus now that army personnel are required to assist our police force in major cities. The police are neither trained nor equipped to deal with terror threats.

In his recent presser, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan also warned the provincial governments of Sindh, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa that army personnel from their cities would be withdrawn unless called for assistance under Article 245.

That PML-N, having had such a tumultuous relationship with the army recently, is prepared to give such public space and trust to the armed forces is telling.

Perhaps we have finally come to accept that we are in a state of war and these are extraordinary times.

The Constitution provides adequate measures under Article 245 and the federal and provincial governments can make effective use of this provision by issuing meaningful directions to the armed forces which are specific and limited to the terror threat that Pakistan today faces.

Such measures will go some way in ensuring that our terrorism crisis is addressed, and in doing so, we don’t invite a constitutional one too.

The writer is a lawyer at Ebrahim Hosain. He was an advisor to Justice (retd) Fakhruddin G Ebrahim during his tenure as CEC from July 2012 to July 2013.