<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Rule of Law Institute &#187; iinternal turmoil</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ruleoflawinstitute.org/tag/iinternal-turmoil/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ruleoflawinstitute.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:44:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>To Fight Terror, Allow Democracy</title>
		<link>http://ruleoflawinstitute.org/2009/03/to-fight-terror-allow-democracy/</link>
		<comments>http://ruleoflawinstitute.org/2009/03/to-fight-terror-allow-democracy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Hancock</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[International Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Op-Ed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iinternal turmoil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyers' movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Musharraf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule of law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rule of Law Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zardari]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ruleoflawinstitute.org/?p=68</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently, Pakistan&#8217;s Supreme Court, in a politically engineered decision, ruled two of the nation&#8217;s leading political figures ineligible to stand for elections. The decision demonstrates why an independent judiciary is fundamental to a free and just society &#8211; and crucial to the legitimacy of any democratically elected government, but also U.S. national security interests in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently, Pakistan&#8217;s Supreme Court, in a politically engineered decision, ruled two of the nation&#8217;s leading political figures ineligible to stand for elections. The decision demonstrates why an independent judiciary is fundamental to a free and just society &#8211; and crucial to the legitimacy of any democratically elected government, but also U.S. national security interests in the region. The decision of the executive controlled court has intensified internal turmoil and is distracting the government from fighting terrorism.<span id="more-68"></span></p>
<p>The Obama Administration has repeatedly recognized the importance of Pakistan to regional and U.S. national security. Given this recognition, and taking note of Vice President Biden&#8217;s insightful proposals before leaving the Senate, the President should abandon his predecessor&#8217;s failed policy and support meaningful democratic reforms and the restoration of the judiciary rather than military engagement alone.</p>
<p>March 9 marked the two-year anniversary of the Pakistani Lawyers&#8217; Movement, which formed to restore the Rule of Law in wake of executive assaults on the judiciary. After Pervez Musharraf &#8211; a military dictator supported by the U.S. &#8211; sacked the Chief Justice of Pakistan&#8217;s Supreme Court in March 2007, the Lawyers&#8217; Movement took to the streets, building a national movement across all sectors of society to restore democracy. In the response to mass protests, Musharraf declared an emergency, suspended the constitution and ordered the arrest and detention of judges, lawyers, journalists, and civil society members. Musharraf claimed that he could not fight the U.S. &#8220;War on Terror,&#8221; while facing the democratic constraints of an independent judiciary and free press.</p>
<p>Despite U.S. support for Musharraf, he was ultimately forced by public pressure to resign in August 2008. This was the first time in Pakistan&#8217;s 62 year history that a military ruler peacefully stepped down from power. However, despite Musharraf&#8217;s resignation, general elections in February 2008 in which the Pakistani people overwhelmingly supported judicial restoration, and repeated promises from Pakistan&#8217;s political elite, the judiciary remains politicized &#8211; as illustrated last week when it ruled the Sharif brothers ineligible. To this date the judiciary has not been fully restored and the Rule of Law continues to wither.</p>
<p>President Asif Zardari continues to defy the will of the electorate by failing to restore the judiciary. Zardari, like the military rulers before him, has no interest in allowing a Court the independence necessary to check his unrestrained fiat. Like Musharraf, Zardari persists in manipulating and intimidating the judiciary as a means of consolidating his personal political control. Last week&#8217;s Supreme Court decision concerning the Sharif brothers&#8217; eligibility to contest elections is a perfect illustration.</p>
<p>Nawaz Sharif alleged that Zardari offered to drop their case in exchange for the Sharifs&#8217; assurance that they would end their call for the restoration of the judiciary. Circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that Zardari engineered the court&#8217;s decision in order to eliminate his political rivals and did so through three judges who were unconstitutionally appointed by Musharraf. Using the court&#8217;s decision as cover, Zardari ordered that Punjab, a province previously controlled by the publicly elected PLM-N, come under Executive rule.</p>
<p>In a further effort to silent political dissent, Zardari suspended the PPP party membership of Aitzaz Ahsan, a leader of the Lawyers&#8217; Movement. Pakistani lawyers and civil society continue to demand the restoration of the judiciary and the completion of the transition to democracy. In response, Zardari has pushed through legislation banning peaceful political assembly in Islamabad, Punjab and Sindh, barred the press from entering the National Assembly and preemptively arrested political party opponents and lawyers.</p>
<p>The U.S. supported Pakistani government, in spite of its attacks on the Rule of Law, has undermined not only democracy in Pakistan, but also U.S. interests in the region. For example, since 2001, Musharraf squandered over $11 billion dollars in direct U.S. aid intended for fighting terrorism, which he allegedly diverted to retain his support within the military and upgrade weapons poised against India, while terrorism related offenses increased. U.S. military aid to Pakistan continues unabated, further entrenching the position of the military at the expense of civilian institutions.</p>
<p>In the three months since Obama has taken office, his administration has continued to bomb targets inside Pakistan while failing to insist on democratic reforms. U.S. policy should not focus solely on the military aspects of &#8220;The War on Terror.&#8221; Rather, it should aim to win popular support by advancing democracy. This view compels ending unconditional support for the military and instead supporting independent institutions that hold the greatest promise for building genuine democracy in Pakistan. Even the Pakistani government acknowledges that a military policy alone will not bring sustainable regional or international security, as evidenced by Zardari&#8217;s recent negotiation with Taliban militants in the northern Swat Valley.</p>
<p>Specifically, Obama should commit to support the plan outlined by Joe Biden when still Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senator John Kerry. The U.S. should curb it&#8217;s dependence on the ISI and military, impose rigorous auditing procedures on all future military aid and invest in long-term development projects which focus on education and public infrastructure to demonstrate U.S. support for the people &#8211; rather than the military generals &#8211; of Pakistan. At a minimum, Washington should insist upon the restoration of all judges deposed in 2007. Failure to do so will prolong instability in Pakistan and leave the rest of the world subject to the country&#8217;s continued lawlessness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ruleoflawinstitute.org/2009/03/to-fight-terror-allow-democracy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
