By Abdillahi Hussein Daud

In a democratic system of government, the Supreme Court is the final arbitrator of all disputes. It is, therefore, extremely important that citizens have faith in what some call the referee of the last resort---the Supreme Court. However, its recent decisions vis-à-vis “Election Commission” and “Security Committees” call into questions the apex court’s very ability to discharge the constitutional duty of rendering judgments independent of that of the executive branch of the government. Before the public’s trust in the court, as the dispenser of justice, finally fades away, judges in the apex court must rescue of what is left, if any, of their reputation in the eyes of increasingly impatient public. Nevertheless, the justices alone cannot rescue the reputation of the court. The executive as well as the legislative branches of the government must also shoulder their constitution duty of ensuring the independence of the judiciary. Failure to do so may give some people the wrong impression that the battlefield rather than the Supreme Court is the one which determines the outcome of disputes. Any such scenario can only be ignored at our peril since our democratic system is so fragile and our memory of recent civil wars is so vivid.

First, the executive branch must resist its temptation to impose its will on the courts. The very existence of our democratic system, in which the ruling party brags of being its pioneer, rests largely with three independent branches of government each furnishing the other checks and balances that are so essential for its smooth functioning. The ruling party must accept the fact that respecting the judgments of the court, even when its decisions defy the position of the Presidency, makes our democratic system stronger and not weaker. Asked about his decision to abandon any further legal challenges in the aftermath of U. S. Supreme Court ruling following 2000 Presidential election, the then candidate Al Gore said he didn’t want Americans to lose faith in their system. By using our Supreme Court as merely a rubber stamp, the ruling party is pushing the public to a stage where people lose faith in our system of government.

Second, the legislative branch must play its part to strengthen the institution of the Judiciary by enacting laws ensuring life appointments of court’s justices. This will remove any pressure from justices to worry about their tenures in the court. Any ordinary justice who is worried about the future of his tenure will not, most likely, upset the President. Moreover, the legislative branch must remove the President’s power to fire any Supreme Court justices.

Third, the justices of the court must not abdicate their constitutional responsibility of restoring citizen’s trust in court’s judgments. Individuals always come and go; what is at the stake is the institution of the judiciary. Neither the executive nor the legislative can do much for the Institution of the Judiciary if the honorable justices of the Supreme Court are unwilling or unable to reclaim their power as interpreters of the constitution.

Finally, the civil society groups and grass-rooted organizations must also mobilize the public in order to push for legislations ensuring the independence of the judiciary. This is perhaps the best way to demonstrate to the international community, whose recognition we so eagerly await, that we are part of the civilized world where disputes are settled in courts of law rather than in battlefields.

abdhdaud@yahoo.com