The judiciary in the Subcontinent since Independence has carried the burden of great expectations. It was meant to be the final arbiter between state and citizen, the guardian of liberty, the shield against arbitrary power. Yet, more often than not, it has wavered under political pressure. At critical moments in history, judges have chosen the path of compromise rather than resistance. The record is uneven, but not without flashes of brilliance that continue to inspire faith in the institution.

In Pakistan, this paradox is sharply visible. Courts have legitimised martial law on more than one occasion. Yet the same judiciary has also produced judges who refused to bend, paying the price in isolation or forced retirement. The words of Justice AR Cornelius remain etched in memory: "The law is not an instrument of the government; it is a restraint upon all of us, the government included." His voice was that of a jurist who understood that the majesty of law lies precisely in its ability to limit the powerful, not to serve them.

The current convulsions within the........

© The Express Tribune