Pyrrhic Victory
NEED TO KNOW
Pyrrhic Victory
PAKISTAN
Last fall, Pakistan’s parliament passed a constitutional amendment that stripped the top court of some of its powers while shoring up those of the country’s back-seat rulers, the military.
While the government said the move was necessary to restore stability at a time when turmoil is escalating in the country – and with its neighbors – critics countered that it undermines the country’s democracy and risks turning Pakistan into an authoritarian state.
But then, that’s the point, say observers: If it is a choice between enforced stability and democracy, Pakistan’s rulers say stability is the choice – irrespective of the cost.
Passed on Oct. 21 with extraordinary speed in the middle of the night and without the usual public review process for fear of being preemptively blocked by the Supreme Court, the amendment doubled the number of Supreme Court judges to dilute the power of those that have sided with the opposition in the past. It changed the appointment process for the chief justice position to favor pro-government candidates.
It also stripped the court of its power to take up certain cases including political cases, while shoring up the power of the military.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said the amendment would reaffirm parliamentary supremacy, and be a “milestone” for the country’s political and economic stability.
Critics said the amendments “are an attempt to subjugate the judiciary and bring it under the control of the executive.”
Michael Kugelman of the Wilson Center told the South China Morning Post he saw them as a “devastating blow” to Pakistan’s democracy and which makes the legislature a “rubber stamp” for the military: “These changes give more power to unelected forces that often already enjoy impunity.”
“(Pakistan is fast becoming) part of a club you don’t want to be grouped with if you care about democracy,” he added, referring to Egypt and Turkey who “emphasize the imperatives of brutal efficiency over democracy. That’s no recipe for long-term stability … but a ‘Pyrrhic victory’.”
Still, bringing the courts under control is an old fight in Pakistan partially because “power-drunk, headline-hogging judges have contributed to the mess,” wrote the Economist, detailing how Supreme Court judges have solicited funds to build a dam and other un-judicial measures.
More critically, the court has removed two prime ministers in the past 15 years and helped bring the enormously popular former prime minister, Imran Khan, to power, say analysts.
Most agree the new amendment is meant to target supporters of Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party: The government had been worried that the Supreme Court would release Khan and even invalidate the January 2024 election.
Khan was ousted in a 2022 no-confidence vote. Since then, the government has tried to keep him out of politics – he has been jailed since 2023 and was sentenced to 14 years for corruption on Jan. 17. He says the charges are political.
Meanwhile, candidates backed by his party swept the elections in early 2024 in spite of running in the “most rigged” election in the country’s history, which was also seen as a public repudiation of the generals. Since then, Pakistan has seen regular protests demanding Khan’s release and an invalidation of the election results. These protests have often faced violent crackdowns.
Alongside the attempt to sideline the top court is a renewed crackdown on civil space. For example, the government created new courts to hear defamation cases brought by the military against the opposition or civil society activists, cases they label as “digital terrorism.”
On Tuesday, Pakistan passed a bill that would implement sweeping controls on social media that include blocking platforms and sending users to prison for spreading disinformation or content deemed “offensive,” such as posts critical of judges, the military, or the government, the Associated Press reported. Journalists took to the streets in protest, while civil liberties groups said the law was intended to crack down on freedoms of speech and press.
The government is considering a bill to allow the security forces to detain anyone without a warrant for 90 days, reported Dawn.
The government says these measures are necessary to usher in the stability needed to bring the country’s economic crisis under control and maintain investor and debtor confidence. They also say they are necessary to deal with a surge in terrorism from separatists in Baluchistan and other militants such as the Pakistani Taliban who are getting support from Afghanistan. In December, that support led to Pakistani airstrikes on Afghanistan that killed almost 50 people.
Writing in the Nation, Pakistani writer Hasan Ali said the country is in a spiral.
“Amid the dizzying churn of Pakistani politics, where political parties take turns doing the military’s bidding and journalists are terrorized for holding them to account,” he wrote, “there is a sense that the country has never been so broken.”
THE WORLD, BRIEFLY
Heavy Prices
SWEDEN
An Iraqi refugee who staged Quran-burning protests in Sweden was shot dead late Wednesday near Stockholm, just hours before a court was to issue a verdict in his trial of incitement, the Washington Post reported.
Salwan Momika, 38, came to Sweden in 2018 and gained international notoriety in 2023 after he burned a copy of the Quran outside a mosque during the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha. His actions sparked global condemnation, diplomatic tensions, and security threats against Sweden.
They also ignited fury in the Muslim world, leading to violent protests, attacks on Swedish diplomatic missions in Iraq, and threats from extremist groups.
Momika was standing trial on charges of “agitation against an ethnic or national group” for a number of Quran-burning demonstrations.
After his death, the Stockholm court dismissed the case against him Thursday but postponed the verdict for his co-defendant until Monday. The second defendant later posted on X, “I’m next.”
Government officials condemned the murder, calling it a direct “threat to our free democracy” and warned of possible repercussions.
Swedish authorities have so far arrested five people in connection with the killing but did not confirm whether the shooter was among them.
Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said Sweden’s security services were investigating the possibility of foreign involvement, saying “There is obviously a risk that there is a connection to a foreign power,” according to the Guardian.
Security officials have previously accused Iran of using criminal networks within the country to carry out acts of violence against individuals and groups.
The killing has reignited debates over Sweden’s handling of Quran burnings, which were initially protected under free speech laws but created diplomatic issues, including delaying the country’s membership of NATO.
Making It Official
SYRIA
The Islamist rebel alliance that overthrew Syrian President Bashar Assad in December appointed the country’s de facto leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, as the country’s interim president Wednesday, the Associated Press reported.
During an event in Damascus, new government officials, including commander Hassan Abdul Ghani, announced al-Sharaa’s new role as interim leader, saying he would represent the country and form a “temporary legislative council” until the new constitution is ready.
Ghani, who is spokesman for the Syria Military Operations Command, also unveiled a series of resolutions, including one suspending Syria’s 2012 constitution, noting that it could take up to three years to draft a new one. Al-Sharaa had already said that it might be four years before new elections are held, the BBC reported.
He also said Syria’s parliament, army, security agency, and all armed groups who took part in Assad’s ousting have been dissolved, according to the BBC.
Al-Sharaa called for a new, unified military but it is unclear how he plans to bring together members of a patchwork of rebel groups who have different leaders and ideologies.
In his speech Wednesday, al-Sharaa claimed his priorities are to fill the current power vacuum, safeguard civil peace, rebuild state institutions, and build a “development-oriented economy.” In the last few years, he has tried to convey the idea that he values pluralism and tolerance and will safeguard women’s and religious minorities’ rights.
A national dialogue conference where Syria’s different communities will be invited is rumored to being planned but no date has been set.
The Faulty ‘Firewall’
GERMANY
Germany’s opposition conservatives won parliamentary approval on Wednesday for a proposal to restrict migration, a vote that stirred controversy because it breached a “firewall” by working with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, Reuters reported.
Fredrich Merz, the leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), proposed a motion in parliament calling for tougher border controls and asylum rules, which passed with the support of the AfD, sparking anger and recriminations among lawmakers across the political aisle.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz of the center-left Social Democratic Party reprimanded Merz for his actions, calling them an “unforgivable mistake.”
“Since the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany over 75 years ago, there has always been a clear consensus among all democrats in our parliaments: We do not make common cause with the far right,” he told the legislature.
His predecessor, Angela Merkel – also of the CDU – criticized Merz’s decision, saying he had said in November that no measures should be passed with the AfD’s support, wrote Deutsche Welle.
The importance of the firewall against the far right in the Western European country’s political culture is due to the legacy of the Nazi party and its responsibility for the Holocaust.
Many mainstream parties consider it taboo to work with them. Meanwhile, the German security services are monitoring the AfD on suspicion of being a right-wing extremist party.
Even so, the CDU leader defended his actions as “necessary,” and now plans to propose actual legislation on Friday aimed at curbing immigration numbers and family reunification rights, again with possible backing from the AfD, according to the BBC.
The recent controversy comes as Germany heads to parliamentary elections on Feb. 23 following the collapse of Scholz’s three-party coalition.
Merz is the frontrunner for chancellor due to his party’s leading position in the polls. He has pushed for a stricter migration policy following a series of deadly attacks in recent months by migrants.
DISCOVERIES
Body of Law
Laws are cultural constructions, scholars say, varying across centuries and cultures. Still, some laws are universal across time and custom, such as those against murder.
Now, a team of psychologists is wondering whether the way that humans value body parts is just as universal.
“The Bible’s lex talionis – ‘Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot’ – has captured the human imagination for millennia,” the authors wrote in the Conversation, detailing their new study. “This idea of fairness has been a model for ensuring justice when bodily harm is inflicted.”
“Our new study explored a different possibility” they added, “that laws about bodily damage are rooted in something universal about human nature … shared intuitions about the value of body parts.”
The study found that people across different eras and societies instinctively agree upon the worth of body parts when it comes to legal and financial compensation.
The researchers said that principles of ensuring fairness when bodily harm is inflicted have existed for centuries, stemming back to ancient texts such as the Code of Hammurabi, which famously details “an eye for an eye,” embodying the principle of lex talionis, or retributive justice.
This idea is also found in Chinese culture during the Tang dynasty, the Enga people of Papua New Guinea, and many other civilizations, researchers said. The Anglo-Saxon word “weregild,” meaning “man price,” now designates the practice of paying for body parts.
The research team conducted their study with 614 people from the United States and India, none of whom had training in medicine or law. The participants read descriptions of body parts such as “one arm,” “the nose,” “one molar tooth,” and “one eye.”
The researchers chose these body parts because they were found in legal codes from five different cultures and periods. They used the Law of Æthelberht from Kent, England, circa 600 CE and the Guta lag from Gotland, Sweden, circa 1220 CE, and compared these two with worker compensation laws from the United States, South Korea, and the United Arab Emirates.
The participants answered questions about the different body parts they were shown, such as how much compensation an employee should receive if that person lost the body part in an accident in the workplace, or how difficult it would be for them to function in daily life without that body part.
The team found that the values placed on body parts by laypeople and lawmakers were largely consistent through time and space. For example, people across cultures and centuries generally agree that the index finger is more valuable than the ring finger and that one eye is more valuable than one ear.
The researchers added that a person’s local environment and culture might create some differences in how they value body parts. For example, sight would be more important for someone who is a hunter than someone who is a shaman.
The team plans to do more research on these differences but has for now concluded that people such as the authors of the Guta lag, King Æthelberht, or Emirati – and American lawyers – have similar views on the importance of their body parts.