It is said that, being bad is not bad but feeling proud on it is really shameful. Almost the same case exists in Kabul with the rich and powerful who not only do their wrong acts openly but also feel proud on them. There are a handful of powerful people whose names are repeatedly taken in different criminal acts. Sometimes, they are blamed for land-grabbing, then they are accused in corruption, then their names are taken in bank frauds, then their names come in money laundering or narcotics smuggling and in this way, there is an unending story of such fraud, deception and forgery. At times we become surprised that, although being accused in a number of grave crimes, why not any kind of action is taken against them and they are let loose to get involved in another crime. It is also due to the lack of accountability and punishment that they get encouraged to be involved in more and more crimes and this series never comes to an end.

Behind all these is the mechanism of law, its protectors, its implementers and other similar people and it is also a sad reality that all these people are closely linked to each other, both in benefits and fraudulent use of this system. It is unfortunate that last twelve years of democracy was not able to establish a good setup for education, civic facilities and others but of course, these years were enough for some people to establish a very coordinated system to commit crimes and clear their ways using the ladder of law and government. In such circumstances, the question arises, ‘Is there a fault in law that these things are happening smoothly or is there any other problem responsible?’

When we come out of the limited scenario of Afghanistan, there has been an old complaint about the nature, implementation and objectives of the laws being in use in different parts of the world in different ages. It is generally believed in a society that law is sacred and should be observed by people to maintain order and discipline; there is an imperative need to critically examine the law to determine exactly whose interest is it serving. Is the law meant for protecting the property of the ruling classes and to preserve their privileges or is it meant to provide justice to the common man?

There are laws to cover the religious, political, commercial and social aspects of a society. Since religious law derives authority from divine power; these are usually observed without doubt or criticism.

Among the Hindus, for instance, the caste system determines the status of a person by birth, which he cannot change. The Brahmins belong to the upper caste, a privilege that cannot be challenged according to the codes of caste system. These laws cannot be altered and the lower castes have to abide by them for their salvation. The social laws of ancient India were based on the caste system and different fines and punishments were applicable to the upper and lower castes.

In many other societies, the same rule was followed where the nobility was exempted from severe punishment. Whenever law favors the ruling elite, it fails to provide justice to common people and the rulers tend to be oppressive in order to maintain a legal system to check any resistance against it.

Throughout history, despite restrictions and punishment, people resisted unjust and discriminative laws in order to achieve their fundamental rights. For example, the apartheid system of racial discrimination and separation which governed South Africa from 1948 until early 1990s when it was abolished, accompanied many dark chapters. The Europeans occupied the country by force and degraded the local population. The apartheid law was based on racism and injustice and its manifestations included ineligibility from voting, separate residential areas and schools, separate seating for white people and black people in parks and gardens, separate windows in post offices and separate travel compartments in trains. The black people would only be hired for menial jobs.

When members of the African National Council resisted these laws, leaders including Nelson Mandela were declared terrorists and jailed for violation of these laws. They refused to accept the unjust system and spent 27 years in prison where they also confronted discrimination-the white people had concession while the black people were treated harshly. However, the resistance movement changed the whole system giving way to democracy which granted equal rights to the natives.

The American society was equally founded on brutal forms of domination, inequality and oppression which involved the absolute denial of freedom for slaves. Neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the constitution granted them their fundamental rights. Although the civil war ended the slavery, the discriminatory laws against the slaves remained intact. In the Southern states, white people had exclusive hotels, schools and bus seats which the black people were denied access to by the state law.

However, in 1955, Rosa Parks, a 42 year old African-American woman initiated a new era of freedom and equality, by refusing to give up her seat for a white man. This eventually mobilized African-American activists and mass protests began to demand their fundamental rights. Martin Luther King emerged as the leader of this movement and the government was forced to repeal the discriminatory laws.

In India, Gandhi led a campaign to extract salt from sea water instead of buying it at high prices with taxes levied by the British. British laws made it a crime to produce one’s own salt in a region that had seen many famines in the past. The main message of this non-violent movement was to fight against unjust laws that did not serve the interest of the people.

When we look at our own society, we discover that there are many laws that either oppress the masses or are being used to oppress them or at least to protect the rights and benefits of the powerful. It is the reasons why, complaints are increasing, which were first directed towards those who implemented these laws and now the guns have been moved towards the law itself. There is no doubt that laws are made to serve the prime and general objectives of the society so that all the members of society should live peacefully and attain their objectives of welfare, prosperity and healthy growth but if these laws don’t serve these objectives, they no more retain their respect and dignity which is the attribute of law. When the situation worsens to this extent, the laws remain no more important than few lines of statement which bring no comfort to the general masses and which don’t serve their objectives. In such circumstances, if the corrective measures were not taken, the masses may stand up to tear away the laws and also those who protect and implement these laws for their own benefits. This has been the trend in the history and the facts of history will never change.