Madness and anger

Whatever concerns there may be about the JIT, everyone needs to proceed with caution. Unfortunately, this was lost on the now-former Senator Nehal Hashmi of the PML-N who launched an extraordinary attack on the JIT, threatening to go after its members and their families once they retire. This was nothing short of madness. Hashmi’s speech not only crossed all limits of decency but constituted a grave attack on the very concept of justice. This has done his party no good, greatly reducing whatever moral weight it thought it might have gained after strange reports about the JIT came to light. The party has, in any case, an unenviable history of institutional clash with the SC, and few have forgotten the storming of the SC in 1998. This blot is likely why the PML-N moved so quickly to deal with the matter by admonishing him sternly and suspending his party membership. Hashmi’s resignation from the Senate quickly followed. Those who criticised the PML-N for failing to defend its own are off the mark. He deserves all the condemnation and treatment he has got. Threatening the families of those that dare hold the Sharifs accountable is not just ridiculous but unforgivable.

On Thursday, Hashmi had to appear before the court, apologising to everything in the universe and its Maker. Damage, though, had already been done and the worry has since been that a clash between institutions was around the corner. Speculation intensified after the government’s response to Honourable Justice Ejaz Afzal’s statements and the reference therein to mafias. It appears that the government is hurt and angry at what it perceives to be unfair treatment. Conversely, the anger of the judges can be understood in light of the criminal folly committed by a leader of the ruling party and ‘defender’ of the Sharif family. We have seen anger on all sides arising from comments made by everyone in this matter and interpreted in ways that please some and make others think they are being harshly treated. Anger will do no one any good. Quite a few reputations are at stake here and any clash will only benefit those who, on every turn and twist in the case, want battle lines drawn between institutions. The challenge is to see the cause of justice, according to the law, served and this warts-and-all democracy of ours emerging better or at least intact. Everyone needs to step back from the brink when they reach it and parochial interests should not be allowed to trump those of the country.