Supreme Court ruling now…
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
I think Gillani will resign to save his boss
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Supreme Court summons PM Gilani to come to court on 19th January
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Gillani is corrupt or not but he sure is stupid
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
This was already predicted by Babr Sattar in his article today..
Court had to decide on merit without taking in to the consideration the political consequences of the decision to show the justice being done..
Govt. will go for review by the full bench.. SC gave a leverage to the govt. by not constituting the full bench to give more time to the government.
As far as the decision was concerned they had to decide one way or another to negate the impression that SC is shying away from taking the decision..
Hard cases
Babar Sattar
Monday, January 16, 2012
Is the NRO Implementation case really a hard case? Do courts not hear contempt cases almost on a daily basis where they simply determine whether or not a party is in breach of a binding court order and where such party is found to have committed contempt it is punished in accordance with the law (unless it furnishes an unconditional apology and the court accepts it)? Does a contempt issue become legally complex and get transformed into a hard case because implementation of the binding court order can affect the person of the president and the alleged contempt is being committed by the prime minister? Isn’t legal equality the foundational principle of rule of law? Do courts have the discretion of electing whether or not to enforce settled law in view of the political consequences that are likely to follow?
There are two schools of thought criticising the interim NRO Implementation Order passed by the Supreme Court this past week: the “legal purists” and the “consequentialists.” And within consequentialists, at one end of the spectrum are those supporting legal purists, not for their appreciation of legal principles and the jurisprudence being produced by the apex court, but because they hope that the court will somehow ease the Zardari-Gillani duo out of power. At the other end of the consequentialist spectrum are those who wish for the Supreme Court to elect the sixth option in its interim order – i.e., do nothing and leave it to the people to judge those who refuse to abide by the law and court verdicts – as they believe the court is guilty of usurping executive authority, dispensing selective justice and ultimately becoming an instrument of regime change.
Let us start with the legal purists who disagree with both sets of consequentialists identified above. There are at least four legal arguments available to critique the interim NRO Implementation Order. One, the court seems to have expanded the subject matter pending before it. Instead of addressing the issue of whether or not the government is in breach of the NRO judgment and punishing delinquents for contempt of court, it has brought into play issues that seem extraneous to contempt proceedings (such as whether the prime minister and the president are dishonest and liable to be disqualified for violating their oath of office). This expansion of the subject matter and the serious consequences the court has hinted at are giving rise to accusations that the court is on a witch-hunt aimed at triggering regime change.
Two, is the nature of discretion that judges have while adjudicating legal disputes such that they can take into account the political or social consequences of their decisions? While pleading cases should lawyers now also warn courts of the disagreeable social and political consequences that might follow if the law is upheld? Can a court refuse to uphold the death sentence awarded to Mumtaz Qadri on the sole ground that it might lead to social unrest or violence? Is there any significance of the NRO implementation case other than the fact that it involves the person of the president and the prime minister? Is the involvement of top public-office holders of any legal relevance other than that if the head of the state and the government ridicule the law, why would others not follow suit?
So one the one hand is the matter of principle that law ought to be applied without considerations of fear or favour. On the other is the consideration of policy that if the prime minister is convicted for contempt it could lead to political unrest and machinations as parliament will need to elect a new prime minister. Can the courts subject matters of principle to considerations of policy? Granted that judges are human and the socio-political currents of the times are likely to influence their thinking and policy positions. But are judicial codes of conduct not meant to keep them secluded from transient social and political influences? As a jurisprudential matter, are the social and political consequences of enforcing the law not a consideration completely irrelevant and impermissible in determining what the law is and how it should be enforced?
Three, the reasoning of the court in the interim NRO Implementation Order seems subjective and the link created between breach of court verdict, amounting to violation of the Constitution and infidelity to the oath of office, leading to the prima facie finding of dishonesty, and a ground of disqualification from parliament, is tenuous at best. Expansion of the scope of fundamental rights in recent times is a welcome development. But interpreting all provisions of the Constitution in such broad terms that the written text of our fundamental law begins to lose its meaning is disconcerting. Even where fundamental rights are involved there is need to lay down objective eligibility criteria and tests that must be satisfied to attract judicial scrutiny of executive actions. And the level of scrutiny should then depend on the nature of right in question and whether the petitioner belongs to a vulnerable group within the society.
And, four, the Supreme Court is the highest court of the land and its decisions establish precedents that are also binding on lower courts. What kind of a precedent has the interim NRO Implementation Order set? Should courts proactively contrive alternatives and negotiate and debate them with those in breach of court verdicts? Can executing courts opt to do nothing when implementing binding court verdicts if the mighty in the society or the government refuse to abide by judicial decisions? Does the court exist to protect the rights of the people or are the people meant to take the law in their own hands and become implementing agents of court orders where the court itself throws its hand up? Is there any legal or constitutional argument that can justify option six posited by the court? If judges of the apex court agree not to enforce the binding decision of a 17-member bench, would that not be a breach of their own constitutional oaths?
Those who argue that we are caught in an either/or situation and must choose between one of the two public goods – rule or law and democracy – are mistaken. Rule of law and democracy are twin-values comprising the larger concept of constitutionalism and they neither compete nor contradict one another. Both sets of consequentialits – those mad at the court for not sending the Zardari-Gillani duo to the gallows without further ado, and those mad at the court for adjudicating matters related to the PPP leadership that result in exposing their murky deeds, weakening the ruling civilian government and entrenching the perception that all politicians are corrupt – are neither really rooting for democracy nor rule of law. They are wrong for their assessment of judicial verdicts rests on the political consequences these verdicts are likely to produce.
It is about time we learnt from our pitiful history that an elected civilian government deriding judicial authority and mocking court verdicts doesn’t serve the cause of democracy, and a court issuing verdicts laced in moral outrage while being blind to the limits of its authority on the one hand, and seen as dispensing selective justice producing political consequences on the other, doesn’t further the cause of rule of law. There can be no excuse or justification for an elected government to refuse to abide by court verdicts. But more alarming is a social, political and legal order that acquiesces in disobedience of the law. The government’s intransigence on the NRO verdict, the Supreme Court’s sixth option, and 38 percent of the people of Pakistan who seem to feel that the judiciary is exceeding its authority (according to the latest Gallup poll), all suggest that the moral authority of law itself and its arbiters is fast eroding in Pakistan.
(Concluded)
The writer is a lawyer based inIslamabad. Email: [email protected]
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
As I said earlier that Lagta hay hamaray great Sadar Sahib key Sadarat ko bachanay kay liye PM ko qurbani daini he paray gi :cobra: Now it has been confirmed 
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
^Agr NRO ko MEMOGATE kay saath mila ker paRhaiN tu lagta hay kay Sadar Sahib bhi buhat dinooN tak sadar nahi rahaiN gay
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
I think PM knows this : Yaar Zinda Sohbat Baqi… Zinda hai Zardari Zinda hai. 
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Chaadi Kapra aur Bunyaan Maang Raha hay Pakistan 
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Mehngai ne kad li sab ki jaan
Baich raha hai bachay ab insaan
Kahan gaya wo sab samaan
Roti Kapda aur Makaan.
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Baycharay PM aur President kay pass :cobra:
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
PM Sahib you have to answer all these question now :sannan:
[RIGHT]**Abdul Qadir Gailani (son of our very pious PM ) :cobra: **
[/RIGHT]
[RIGHT]
**مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ میرے آباواجداد نے انگریزوں سے جائیدادیں لیں اور پھر ایک پیسا خیرات میں دے دیا
مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ میری ماں نے چوون کروڑ کا قرضہ لیا اور چھ کروڑ میں پلی بارگین باقی سارا ہڑپ
مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ میرے باپ نے ایک ڈیل کی رشوت میں لاہور ڈیفنس میں چودہ کروڑ کے دو گھر لئے
مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ خواجہ کو او جی سی ایل کا چیرمین لگانے کے لئے پینتیس کروڑ کیش میں لیا
مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ میری لندن کی صرف ہیررڈز کی شاپنگ کا بل اکتالیس ہزار پاونڈ تھا
مجھے اس بات پر بھی فخر ہے کہ وکٹوریہ کسینو لندن میں ایک رات میں اپنی روحانی گدی کے مریدوں
سے وصول کردہ پچاس ہزار پاونڈ ہارے
شرم نہیں آتی تم سب کمی کمینوں کو تم گناہگار مرید اور ہم نسلی پیر**
[/RIGHT]
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Yeh Hum nasli peer kia hote hain? 
NEW ARTICLE: NRO DECISION BY SUPREME COURT
Now that Gilani is charged for contempt by SC, something I predicted on other blogs and yesterday I posted my new article on my blog to conclude that Gilani should be made an example by the SC and no more dithering on this matter. I am glad SC has followed this path.
I have requested this and other measures from CJ in my mails to him durling last 6 months.
Re: NEW ARTICLE: NRO DECISION BY SUPREME COURT
Before the incredible moderators on this forum remove my link here is the article published yesterday on my new blog.
SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN VACILLATED AGAIN ON NRO DECISION
BY Ali Khan
The decision of Supreme Court of Pakistan on NRO issue may have shocked or surprised some, but to some of us who have followed the behaviour of Supreme Court of Pakistan in recent years, there were no thunderclap at all.
Some of us weren’t surprised but were expecting this swivet from thePremier Court in Pakistan. I prognosticated it many times in my emails sent to the attention of Chief Justice of Pakistan.
Pakistani Gordon knots are obvious for any independent minded person, whose loyalties are not attached to any particular political party, focus group or any other type pressure group or groupings. Or those who are not under the dictate of any foreign powers, as usually claimed in Pakistani media.
The veracity of the matter is the “Doctrine of necessity” never left the shores of Pakistan, even though it had been venturously advertised many times by the Supreme Court of Pakistan that the dark old ages when this doctrine was used are behind us all.
The issue of notice to Babar Awan by Supreme Court of Pakistan a week ago is case in point. The synthetic doctor had cross the Rubicon a while back, but Supreme Court in its time tested traditions of see no evil, hear no evil kept ignoring his verbiage for years, before finally coming to the realisation that any more delay and foot-dragging would destroy its own credibility beyond repairs.
The factitious Doctor on the other hand took it as “Card Blanche” and kept his tirade going without any arriere-pensee or fear of reprisals. He must have thought Pakistani nation including the Judiciary has accepted and tolerated his daring attacks on the institution of Judiciary as they have assented his fake doctorate, prefabricated from a diploma mill for a pittance.
But there is no doubt whatever were his intentions or if he considers it his sleight, Babar Awan have caused untold contusion to the reputation of PPP inside and outside of Pakistan, with overseas Pakistanis and with those in the foreign media who take interest in Pakistani politics and off course in diplomatic circles.
The case of Babar Awan is the microcosms of the problems faced by Pakistan.
The proclivity of accepting abstruse people with questionable morals and characters in Politics is rancid in Pakistan. Pakistanis acquiesce people either on the basis of their social standings in the society or on the basis of their affiliations with the political parties but never on the basis of morals and characters. Such callousness has brought Pakistan disaster after disaster in domestic as well as international arenas but alas no lessons have been learned.
There is no better example than the fate of a German Defence Minister, to see the difference between the behaviours in Pakistan and how in comparison civilised countries behave.
Ex-Defence Minister of Germany Karl-Theodor Zu Guttenberg was accused of plagiarism in his doctoral thesis. Guttenberg first admitted “serious mistakes” in his 2006 dissertation but denied cheating. He also offered that he would forgo use of the title “Doctor” to ward off the criticism.
But despite his efforts the furore continued, Bayreuth University then conducted an enquiry and the committee formed by the university found Guttenberg had “grossly violated standard research practices and in so doing deliberately deceived”. The committee concluded “it was obvious that plagiarism was involved”.
Zu Guttenberg resigned before the publications of committee’s findings. He was a rising star in his party Christian Social Union (CSU) and was tipped to go right at the top in the party cadres.
When we compare this incident with Babar Awan’s example we see vast dissimilitude behaviour not only by Awan but his cohorts in PPP and by Pakistani Society at large.
Even though Awan’s doctorate, “a piece of worthless paper” to be more precise was obtained after payment of few hundred dollars to a diploma mill, meagre amount compare to what finances would be required to obtain a doctorate from a reputable University in the West.
But Awan never showed any remorse towards this thimblerig he aimed at Pakistani Nation. On the contrary as expected he showed tenacity in proving his doctorate is bona fide. Only consolation he could claim is that his doctorate was genuinely issued by a bogus university. What can be said, but that Awan think he is a polyhistor at fauxing others. We witnessed him demonstrating it regularly to Pakistani nation. He had been burlesquing his opponents for years, now he is mocking the Judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan too.
Instead of resigning like the German Minister or him completely removed from the public scenes by his party PPP, Awan continued to defy the common sense, logic and decent behaviour.
Zu Guttenberg’s degree was genuine earned after writing a dissertation, albeit a plagiarised one, but nevertheless a dissertation. Awan’s degree is obtained from a fake university for fistful of dollars and his dissertation no where to be found. But incredulous Pakistani insists to be a genuinely qualified and blameless in the whole saga. His intentions and insistence to be treated as a genuine holder of a doctorate are quite clear from his use of Doctor with his name.
There is another famous ersatz doctor in Pakistani public life; this one pretends to be an Islamic Scholar. The most disturbing part of this imitative’s story is that he in the past has worked for the biggest news organisation in Pakistan before moving to one of their rivals. Even more preposterous and disturbing part is the use of the title “Doctor” with his name in the credits of the programs he presents on the TV despite the fact that his degrees are fake is a public knowledge. His con tricks are not limited to the Doctorate.
The Management of his current employers were requested through a message on their website that use of Doctor with his name in program credits is an insult to Pakistani nation and it is highly questionable on moral grounds, if we leave the legal grounds of such proclamations on one side. Despite full knowledge by his employers both past and present that this man is holding fake degrees including doctorate, the practices to present him as a doctor and an Islamic Scholar have not ceased.
The sole reason for specific mention of these two individuals in public life is to prove that the standards have slipped so much in our public life that we are not only tolerating the mountebank and cozener but are glorifying them.
Recently Babar Awan was issued notice by Supreme Court of Pakistan whether his membership of SC Bar Association should be suspended or cancelled due to his persisting disregard for the sanctity of the highest court in the Land. But why surprisingly the Bar didn’t move far earlier when the facts about Awan’s fake doctorate were publicised? Why he was not ordered to stop using the title of the “Doctor” with his name, otherwise his membership of the Supreme Court Bar Association would be cancelled?
Instead of Babar made to resign from his post of Law Minister and sidelined by his party earlier, he recently resigned from his position on the orders of SC to represent PPP before the supreme court in a case of mammoth importance. But it could be said, it is not hard to understand behind the scenes he probably even now retained control of the Law Ministry.
The moral of the story is when such characters are given importance and are glorified in public life then Pakistanis should expect the downfall of the society and nation as a whole. This foozle in standards in public life is visible in Pakistan, where corruption and disrespect of the Law and state institutions is visible to a besotted person. But alas, Pakistani nation is still not learning from its flubs and making amends.
If what one Journalist has reported is correct after a recent meeting in the President House, it is decided that the Government to engage in a tug-of-war with Supreme Court and not to goose-step with its order to write the letter to the Swiss authorities, then the troubles are just starting for Pakistan. If this news is correct then surely the end of PPP Government is neigh. Or else Supreme Court would loose its pridefulness and authority over the nation. In any civilised society there cannot be different rules and laws for different people.
Any attempts to treat the privileged differently from the masses always create an exclusive society where breakdown in Law and Order is a given certainty. Pakistanis suffering for decades from the contagium to give sui generis treatment to the privileged.
Supreme Court of Pakistan in the past is equally beholden for maintenance of status quo and guilty of treating the privileged above the law. We don’t have to look far in the past, only very recently we had Justice Dogar heading Supreme Court of Pakistan.
What saddens educated Pakistanis is that Supreme Court of Pakistan is still using “Doctrine of necessity” despite denying it. I sensed it few months ago and wrote an email for the attention of Chief Justice, where I gave example of a small town magistrate in the UK who would send the misfeasor, purloins contrabands to the jail if they are proven guilty. I compare the decisions of magistrate to the decisions of Supreme Court of Pakistan where those who have misappropriated billions in Rental Power Plants fiasco are going Scott-free as long as they return the loot back. Even a Minister conveniently made an excuse of not knowing how millions of rupees dropped in his bank accounts without his notice. To no one surprise he got away with it by returning the money. Where as in the UK a small town Magistrate would have sent each and every larcenist to the Jail or order community service no matter if even a small amount was stolen.
This is such a travesty of justice that it may not be matched by any civilised nation on the face of the earth. Seeing such lax attitude of the Judiciary in Pakistan, world criminals have started to demand the same treatment, if we get caught we return the loot back and viola our misdemeanours are forgotten. Imagine if such laws persist in the world, the criminals would have a field day. This is precisely what is happening in Pakistan, criminals are having a field day. One has to look at the news in Pakistan, everyday filled with violence, death and destruction. If world started to call Pakistan a banana republic then we shouldn’t be surprised or caterwaul. It saddened me to no ends but truth must be told, as Iqbal said “Mujhe hai hukam-e-Azan”.
There is no doubt, Monday should be the end of Supreme Court tether and they will hit the culprits with the full force of the Law.
There is call for sanity to prevail and compromise to reach. This could be yet another big mistake Supreme Court would make to keep the old tradition of “doctrine of necessity” alive and kicking.
All those who are raising such voices are not really friends ofPakistanthey are actually the real enemies. The voices of status quo, who wants the current contrivance to continue. What their demand is to continue exculpate the acts of the guilty and keep pretending nothing happened and compromise for the sake of the country. This is not actually a compromise for the sake of the country but an open animosity and treason against the country. It would only delay the inevitable.
When magma simmers under the surface it is bound to erupt sooner or later. We would be in similar situation again, a cast iron guarantee, probably more quickly than many realise. When people like Babar Awan started to feel they are heroes, a nation should start getting worried, seriously.
The judges could bring the country back from the percept and hand over sever punishments to those who have refused to implement its decision starting from the Prime Minister and the President. Especially the Prime Minister Gilani has to be made an example for his failure to implement Supreme Court’s orders for over two years. For Pakistan it is now or never, any dithering by the premier court in the land would only be delaying the inevitable, wisdom tell us.
**
All rights reserved © 2012**
Re: NEW ARTICLE: NRO DECISION BY SUPREME COURT
I never read Blogs so its useless to advertisement your Blogs :cobra:
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Paidaishi Peer 
kuch loog by chance peer ban jatay hain aur inn kay jad-e-amjad bhi peer FAQEER they :cobra:
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Is this going to be called biased? because if SC or any other govt in future decides to take action on the fraud and corruption cases mentioned above, then alot here and in Pakistan will call it political victimization ( if they are not in govt) or SC is biased ( if they are in govt)
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
Adding to above, i have no doubt about the service of the Abdul Qadir GIllani ( the real one) for Islam but the way his generation have used his name, i guess that will neutralize all the services he had done… This goes for all other guddi nasheens
Re: BREAKING NEWS - NRO Implementation Case: PM Gilani issued contempt of court notic
I’m with the SC 
and First time they are taking action against current Govt. Army should not involve in this and they have to get punished by SC 