The perils of judicial populism

Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to the pressures of the times.

– Warren E. Burger (1907-1995), Chief Justice, US Supreme Court.
The best thing that explains the Supreme Court’s (SC’s) July 20 judgment is: it is never too late to mend. As is being claimed, the judgment is historic, it is daring, it is a people’s verdict, and a turning point in Pakistan’s history. Of course, it is all these or maybe more, but things are meaningful only in a

Continue Reading →

The perils of judicial populism

Judges rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to the pressures of the times.
– Warren E. Burger (1907-1995), Chief Justice, US Supreme Court.

The best thing that explains the Supreme Court’s (SC’s) July 20 judgment is: it is never too late to mend. As is being claimed, the judgment is historic, it is daring, it is a people’s verdict, and a turning point in Pakistan’s history. Of course, it is all these or maybe more, but things are meaningful only in a context. Without context, they lose their import. This is

Continue Reading →

What’s the game, politically speaking?

Note: I completed this article on December 9, 2014, and wrote: “(Government) ought not to be afraid of martial law the prospects of which are zero presently, rather minus.” Now merely 9 months later the prospects of martial law have grown formidably positive; so what’s the game, politically speaking, let’s try to see:
What’s the game, politically speaking?
In democracy, only a majority party is allowed to rule, and it may turn out to be a tyranny; no smaller party alone can lay a claim to that privilege. That’s the advantage of democracy one can cite while arguing with its

Continue Reading →