un • ru • ly – adjective, -li·er, li·est.
not submissive or conforming to rule; ungovernable; turbulent; intractable; refractory; lawless: an unruly class; an unruly wilderness. *

It’s like the bad old days of policing in the USA: bring in a suspect, interrogate him, and if he doesn’t say what you want, beat the crap out of him. And then charge him with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.
Pakistan’s President/General Musharraf has just done his own macro version of that. Order judges to rule the way he wants – regardless of what the law says – and when they won’t play along, declare a state of emergency, including over the court system. And say it’s because they were “unruly.”
According to BBC News:
The president, who is also head of the army, has said he declared the state of emergency because of a crisis caused by militant violence and an unruly judiciary.
Let’s see. His strong political opponent finally returns to the country and coincidentally somebody bombs the welcoming streets full of celebrating people – somebody whom Musharraf’s troops and tame secret police just couldn’t learn about and stop beforehand. Despite that ELEVEN BILLION US DOLLARS of “antiterrorist” aid Musharraf’s received from the Bush Administration since late 2001, there was this “militant violence.” Uh-huh.
And gosh, it must also just be a coincidence that the nation’s supreme court was about to issue a decision as to whether Musharraf’s re-election as President was voided by his failure to step aside as head of the armed forces as required by law. But, well my goodness, what with all that unruliness going on, there just wasn’t a minute to lose to slap down the court system after individual justices refused to be pushed around by Musharraf’s administration. 
Sounds to me like the only thing unruly about Pakistan’s judiciary is that its members have resisted the dictator’s attempts to push them around.
And don’t you just KNOW some of the farthest-out-there Bushies wish they could do the same thing to the United States courts? I would like to think it could never happen here.
I would also like to think that if it did, US lawyers would show the same courage and take it to the streets like our Pakistani counterparts.
Also, for the record, courtesy of the BBC, here’s a list of the “emergency” restrictions Musharraf has put in place:
-
Constitutional safeguards on life and liberty curtailed
-
Police get wide powers of arrest
-
Suspects can be denied access to lawyers
-
Freedom of movement restricted
-
Private TV stations taken off air
-
New rules curtail media coverage of suicide bombings or militant activity
-
Chief justice replaced, others made to swear oath of loyalty
-
Supreme Court banned from rescinding emergency order
Full BBC story here if the link above doesn’t work.
——————–
*”unruly.” Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1. Random House, Inc. 06 Nov. 2007.)http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unruly



I don’t claim to know a lot about these kinds of situations, but this seems comparable to what was going on in Peru when Fujimori was president. He wanted to be president for a third term and put a lot of these same emergency restrictions in place. He suspended their constitution.
Thank you for writing this post, Suz. I like your focus on the word “unruly”. You’ve helped me understand a little about the situation in Pakistan.
Thanks for your nice comment. I’m learning about Pakistan myself this week. The Economist has some background, including this online background piece on Pakistan’s politics, dated October 31, 2007: