Does the little litigant have a chance to be heard in High Court? Can you ever be safe from the treachery of peers? Do young women lawyers even stand a chance? With a heaviness in my heart, the answer to all of the above questions is no, and it took me all of May to figure it out. Started May with "Power of Now." It was exciting at first to be enjoying life so much, living in the present, feeling your smallness and finite-ness in the constantly shifting universe. Even the negatives - the incompetence, the negligence, the avarice, the meanness promised something better if you simply withstood it, stayed above it. But integrity only goes so far, and pretty soon the day to day elements engulfed me, and the world seemed, no more beautiful or intense - just a bitchy scramble for survival. And really, you can read Tolle and Chopra all you want, but it’s our material reality that ultimately determines who we are most hours of the day, and how we maneuver through its pettiest manifestations.
On Tuesday, students and I sat in Justice MB courtroom. MB was not a PCO judge; he is principled, sweet, and likable. But likability does not change systems. The courtroom was crowded with men, and a handful of hassled women with covered heads, dodging stares and palpable sexism. There was media. The court heard sustainability and jurisdiction arguments, and only later did I realize that this was Rauf Siddiqui's inane blasphemy petition against Zulfiqar Mirza.
The petition was dismissed and this was commendable. But at what cost? The petition did not add to our economic productivity. It did not even put a progressive spin on the debate against the blasphemy laws, simply reinforced class power -- that rich, pathological politicians can, at par with Christian minorities, be targeted in blasphemy cases; but they are swiftly exonerated with the help of competent counsel while lower income minorities like Aslam Masih after being arrested in 2010 on false blasphemy charges languish in prison and then die from dengue fever in custody. Politicians get their unfair share of sacred court time, while the poor, the Dalits get death and detention. And I am not even being dramatic.
Moreover, it was a waste of resources. Jail vans transported incarcerated appellants to court; their hearings were set but not conducted; their lawyers were a 'no-show', and for a reason - they did not practically expect to be heard in light of more pressing issues pertaining to reputations of the rich and notorious. The court bustled with wasted effort. The police guarded detainees who did not need to be there. The drivers waited. It was life, malaise, hierarchy, and nothing useful on a hot Tuesday afternoon - with the little humor offered by the bailiff's archaic uniform, and little respite by the court's cool floors and regal architecture. Enough to make a British colonial lustful, but we blend right in and barely notice. I guess the chai wala from the court canteen made money in case you think I am harping on the negatives.
But besides adding nothing of value - there were several procedural, systemic flaws that have become part of court culture. Lord Woolf, famous for making English courts efficient in 1999 and dealing with clogged dockets, should be thrown in. Foremost, there was too much emphasis on all out oral arguments that are inefficient and usurp court time. Written submissions that make the subtle and the complex legal arguments with references should have been read by the judge prior to hearing and oral arguments streamlined to a 15 to 20 minute (uninterrupted) speech by each party followed by specific questions from the judge. But here, it was like everything was being done right there like a broken system gone awry because the judge has little time to review files beforehand; the bench is over burdened. Counsels interrupt each other and belligerence is acceptable.
Cases should be scheduled to be heard; all Sindh High Court judges should have the assistance of law clerks who summarize for them how each case should be decided; lawyers fined for not showing up or asking for an unwarranted continuance of the case; and although these are public hearings - that right of the public should be balanced by their right to be free from fire hazards that become a real risk when the court corridor is clogged with people.
Most women lawyers had submissive body language. Their law uniforms (dubious in the post critical jurisprudence world) exemplified their enforced conformity and embrace of hierarchy. Uniforms demonstrate discipline; yet in the U.S., lawyers do not wear uniforms and get more work done. In Pakistan, we focus on form over substance. Dull traditions, ceremony, and keeping people in line over what matters.
My students complained of stares. I told them what I tell most young women. Bad men prey on vulnerability. Exude confidence and ability in every move, and while it’s impossible to question an array of oglers, it is possible to put one at task and ask him politely while he tries to consume you with his eyes: Can I help you? Disempower them. Call them out right there. And at all other times minimalize the emotional noise and distraction caused by peripheral harassment. Be combative selectively because patriarchal persecution should not end up defining you. Focus on the work.
This brings me to my second connected lament. Girls have little chance. Paraded by mothers, preened to look marriageable, trained to be hostile to other women and to treat older women as threats of authority rather than as friends and role models. No interest in work and law career, just insidious wifery that allows elite level consumption at boutiques and cafes.
But here's the thing - it’s the female law students who want change that matter. It’s the ones who are stifled by these expectations in a pimping culture, sick of over consumption, classism, sexism, and broken systems. And there are plenty of those as well. But then what does the economy offer these girls? Are there well paying jobs in harassment and personal intrigue free offices that offer meaningful work in exchange for their legal skills? How long before they give up given the mean competition and an ailing economy functioning within war and terror stories. After all, marriage like prostitution is all for economic reasons, and its wrong to be judgmental when financial and social insecurity looms large. Even the upper middle class worries with rising petrol prices and gas guzzling vehicles.
Girls can struggle for reform, heighten the debate, or delay the decay. If they have the resources, the grades, young women should go abroad (India, Bangladesh, Nepal) or to local universities for LLMs and PHds in law. Come back with idealism that will last 10 years. By that time, things will change on the ground because things are always in flux in Pakistan, and too many people with legal issues pushing from underneath for adjudication and their day in court - shifting the power equation in an impermanent universe. There are people in high positions working on judicial reform; in fact many reports have been written on court reform, and while a lot remains to be implemented, systemic reforms an imperative, high court dates are now computerized, and little and big changes possible.
On Tuesday, students and I sat in Justice MB courtroom. MB was not a PCO judge; he is principled, sweet, and likable. But likability does not change systems. The courtroom was crowded with men, and a handful of hassled women with covered heads, dodging stares and palpable sexism. There was media. The court heard sustainability and jurisdiction arguments, and only later did I realize that this was Rauf Siddiqui's inane blasphemy petition against Zulfiqar Mirza.
The petition was dismissed and this was commendable. But at what cost? The petition did not add to our economic productivity. It did not even put a progressive spin on the debate against the blasphemy laws, simply reinforced class power -- that rich, pathological politicians can, at par with Christian minorities, be targeted in blasphemy cases; but they are swiftly exonerated with the help of competent counsel while lower income minorities like Aslam Masih after being arrested in 2010 on false blasphemy charges languish in prison and then die from dengue fever in custody. Politicians get their unfair share of sacred court time, while the poor, the Dalits get death and detention. And I am not even being dramatic.
Moreover, it was a waste of resources. Jail vans transported incarcerated appellants to court; their hearings were set but not conducted; their lawyers were a 'no-show', and for a reason - they did not practically expect to be heard in light of more pressing issues pertaining to reputations of the rich and notorious. The court bustled with wasted effort. The police guarded detainees who did not need to be there. The drivers waited. It was life, malaise, hierarchy, and nothing useful on a hot Tuesday afternoon - with the little humor offered by the bailiff's archaic uniform, and little respite by the court's cool floors and regal architecture. Enough to make a British colonial lustful, but we blend right in and barely notice. I guess the chai wala from the court canteen made money in case you think I am harping on the negatives.
But besides adding nothing of value - there were several procedural, systemic flaws that have become part of court culture. Lord Woolf, famous for making English courts efficient in 1999 and dealing with clogged dockets, should be thrown in. Foremost, there was too much emphasis on all out oral arguments that are inefficient and usurp court time. Written submissions that make the subtle and the complex legal arguments with references should have been read by the judge prior to hearing and oral arguments streamlined to a 15 to 20 minute (uninterrupted) speech by each party followed by specific questions from the judge. But here, it was like everything was being done right there like a broken system gone awry because the judge has little time to review files beforehand; the bench is over burdened. Counsels interrupt each other and belligerence is acceptable.
Cases should be scheduled to be heard; all Sindh High Court judges should have the assistance of law clerks who summarize for them how each case should be decided; lawyers fined for not showing up or asking for an unwarranted continuance of the case; and although these are public hearings - that right of the public should be balanced by their right to be free from fire hazards that become a real risk when the court corridor is clogged with people.
Most women lawyers had submissive body language. Their law uniforms (dubious in the post critical jurisprudence world) exemplified their enforced conformity and embrace of hierarchy. Uniforms demonstrate discipline; yet in the U.S., lawyers do not wear uniforms and get more work done. In Pakistan, we focus on form over substance. Dull traditions, ceremony, and keeping people in line over what matters.
My students complained of stares. I told them what I tell most young women. Bad men prey on vulnerability. Exude confidence and ability in every move, and while it’s impossible to question an array of oglers, it is possible to put one at task and ask him politely while he tries to consume you with his eyes: Can I help you? Disempower them. Call them out right there. And at all other times minimalize the emotional noise and distraction caused by peripheral harassment. Be combative selectively because patriarchal persecution should not end up defining you. Focus on the work.
This brings me to my second connected lament. Girls have little chance. Paraded by mothers, preened to look marriageable, trained to be hostile to other women and to treat older women as threats of authority rather than as friends and role models. No interest in work and law career, just insidious wifery that allows elite level consumption at boutiques and cafes.
But here's the thing - it’s the female law students who want change that matter. It’s the ones who are stifled by these expectations in a pimping culture, sick of over consumption, classism, sexism, and broken systems. And there are plenty of those as well. But then what does the economy offer these girls? Are there well paying jobs in harassment and personal intrigue free offices that offer meaningful work in exchange for their legal skills? How long before they give up given the mean competition and an ailing economy functioning within war and terror stories. After all, marriage like prostitution is all for economic reasons, and its wrong to be judgmental when financial and social insecurity looms large. Even the upper middle class worries with rising petrol prices and gas guzzling vehicles.
Girls can struggle for reform, heighten the debate, or delay the decay. If they have the resources, the grades, young women should go abroad (India, Bangladesh, Nepal) or to local universities for LLMs and PHds in law. Come back with idealism that will last 10 years. By that time, things will change on the ground because things are always in flux in Pakistan, and too many people with legal issues pushing from underneath for adjudication and their day in court - shifting the power equation in an impermanent universe. There are people in high positions working on judicial reform; in fact many reports have been written on court reform, and while a lot remains to be implemented, systemic reforms an imperative, high court dates are now computerized, and little and big changes possible.
2 comments:
The timing of this post is eerie and I'll tell you why. Literally a day ago, I went on an "informal survey", asking my peers and classmates, and also students of second year, what they think the scope of a career in law is in Pakistan.
I intended to write a blog post on people's reactions when I tell them I am pursuing law to practice, Insha'Allah Ta'ala. I wanted to write about the fact that it may well be true, like my father and other relatives had warned me countless times, that there is no scope for women lawyers in Pakistan. Leaving aside the specific issue for women, I wanted to know whether practising law here is really ALL about corruption. Where you hear that every judge can be bought and most lawyers sold, is there a niche to practice honestly, or at least, objectively? I don't know if you remember, but after my first few classes of Criminal law, i came up to you and asked you this question.
Some of those whom I asked, for this "survey", were groping in the dark; others were idealistic about bringing change. The rest said they will see once they step into the abyssys. But no one, it seemed, shared my fears of there being absolutely no scope: either because it was a heavily politicised system, run on contacts, or because it was corrupt, or that it was sexist.
-Nahl
I am beginning to believe that when you start thinking about an issue there are a lot of people thinking about it too. I do not think it is about corruption (practicing law in Ok) but more about how much power you wield in society, your stature - and this is directly connected to how cases will be decided to and therefore how much money you make. Having said that, Nahl, I think everything will change in 15 years when you guys are in the prime of your careers. There will be reforms, and you guys have to push the debate. And here's the thing. Debate and work have to shift because we are a happening society that is desperate for change. I would love to read your blog. I am also really really curious about student experiences (both, esp. femlae) at law firms, the issue of power and harassment, and how students come out of these internships. Also I am happy and willing to work with students who want to set up their own work, but it should be public interest, and try to help them secure funding. because at the end of the day, you have to be paid in order to survive as we are living in no social welfare state, now are we. Thank you for yr thoughtful comment btw!
Post a Comment