Font size: 
The judiciary no longer enjoys the confidence of the people. Whatever semblance of confidence could have been restored through an election, perceived to be relatively fair under the circumstances, was lost with the assassination of one of the two best known political leaders of the country.
Added to this is the fact that President Pervez Musharraf no longer enjoys any legitimacy. Initially his legitimacy lay in the fact that he was the leader of the military and that, for better or worse, he held power in that capacity. However, he is now no longer the leader of Pakistan's military. His legitimacy is rooted only within the political framework of the country -- and now there is no political framework to speak of.
At the moment the greatest victims of the chaos within Pakistan are the middle class and the educated elite, including the professional classes. Over 6,000 lawyers were arrested. Very senior lawyer Munir Malik, the former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association who was tortured so severely that he suffered renal failure, is symbolic of this problem.
This writer has also received news that the two daughters of Asma Jahangir, a well known lawyer and a U.N. rapporteur, were assaulted and threatened. One of the daughters narrowly escaped sexual abuse due to the timely intervention of her mother, who was also threatened by gunmen who belonged to the ruling party.
Benazir Bhutto represented the country's elite, the middle class and the secular forces. Now, as there will be severe polarization within the country, there will be very little room left for this class. Yet this is the class of people on which rests the responsibility of running the legal and democratic institutions according to acceptable standards. The loss of position of this class will severely imbalance the very foundations of legality in the country.
This will further help the polarization of extremist elements -- the army on one hand and on the other, various sectarian forces which have been staging revolts in this dangerous region of the world. Between them they will threaten all aspects of the legal system of the country. The gun and not the rule of law will conduct the social discourse.
There are several countries in South Asia now that have fallen into this situation. From them it can be learned that once this situation comes about, the plunge into the greater abyss of lawlessness is rapid. The state's loss of legitimacy helps other extreme forces, as they no longer have to compete to demonstrate that their positions are more legitimate than the state.
As the state is unable to conduct its affairs on the basis of law, it will also rely more on brute military force. When the legitimacy of the state is undermined this becomes the argument that justifies the actions of the extremists.
The loss of the significance of law threatens individual freedoms and the very property system itself. Many examples in the Asian region demonstrate how large-scale assaults on property by way of land grabbing and cheating in business activities can take place when law enforcement and the adjudicating power of the courts falters. Often various groups enjoying the patronage of the military become the most active elements. Under those circumstances a professional military is replaced with a military that has strong claims on property.
Under the present circumstances it is very doubtful that any election will be perceived by the people as credible. It will take extraordinary effort to convince the public of the legitimacy of any election in the future. Musharraf is unlikely to take any such extraordinary steps to conduct an election that will be perceived as legitimate.
Instead the public perception at the moment is that every possible attempt will be made to subvert a free and fair election. In all likelihood the ghost of Benazir Bhutto will haunt the people of the country, reminding them that there is something foul in the state of Pakistan.
The issue is not whether or not Benazir Bhutto was a great democrat. Her importance lay in being a symbol. Whether a symbol matches reality or not is hardly the question. A symbol is a political expression of something the people themselves are trying to achieve when faced with extreme hardship.
A symbol is often also a counter-symbol. When the consequences of militarism affect people badly they try to create a counter-symbol to remind them of their own need for significant change. When such a symbol is destroyed the people are forced to reflect more deeply on their problems.
This means the military establishment is likely to face far stronger opposition from people who make the ghost of Benazir Bhutto their symbol. For the time being what the people might do appears to be less defined than before. However, people who are pushed into retched conditions -- as are the people of Pakistan -- are more likely than ever to abandon their loyalty to the military. Where the ghost may lead may be much more problematic to those who designed this murder than they ever bargained for.
--
(Basil Fernando is director of the Asian Human Rights Commission based in Hong Kong. He is a Sri Lankan lawyer who has also been a senior U.N. human rights officer in Cambodia. He has published several books and written extensively on human rights issues in Asia.)
