IT doesn't matter what the opinion of the minority is.. what matters is that majority of our awam is supportive of CJ.. CJ zindabad..
He seems to be giving problems to every lotayra chor lol first.musharraf..now PP government..
CJ zindabad.. best man pak has ever had after zia ul haq:)
Zia was the biggest bashtard this land ever saw. may he burn in hell forever for destroying this beautiful country. two generations and a half are paying for his crimes.
I'm part of the awam that supported Iftikhar Chauhdry but the more I see/hear of him now, the more I feel like a fool for supporting this power hungry egomaniac. when the military dictator was in power, he actually gave him the power to rewrite the constitution as he pleased. where was Iftikhar Chauhdry then? oh yeah too busy licking the balls of a dictator. but now that the parliament is amending the constitution with rare consensus, all of a sudden he is getting an itch to assert the "independence" of the judiciary.
why doesn't he assert this independence and power to investigate murder cases against MQM? MQM has got murder cases against it that it had forgiven through the NRO. but those seem invisible to Iftikhar Chauhdry. why doesn't Iftikhar Chauhdry pursue the plight of the missing people? this was his claim to fame after all. this is why people supported him. haven't heard him say anything meaningful there either. instead he keeps embarrassing himself trying to fix the price of sugar and conducting a one-man witchhunt.
Iftikhar Chauhdry learn your place. you might have been restored through the awam. but the same awam will not continue to bail you out for oversized lust for power.
Iftikhar Chauhdry learn your place. you might have been restored through the awam. but the same awam will not continue to bail you out for oversized lust for power.
so the same awam will come back and support the sharifs or ppp based corrupted zardari government? lol
no one has time to look upon the faults of CJ.. not saying there aren't none or they are justified.. but this corrupted government has done so much harm to the nation that people have no choice but to stand behind CJ..
CJ rocks.. may Allah bless him with a long, healthy life.
May Allah grant Pakistan a Bin qasim.. and give guidance to our people who have shed away their imaan and have occupied the heart with the beat of music instead of the quran..:(
Please you must remember in civil society no criminal allow to contest election no matter how popular he is.
Only in our beloved Pakistan corrupts talks about "peoples courts" rather to court of law.
If you feels that Pakistani courts r not impartial then why is he fears independent British or swiss courts?
Why can't he just contest a case in those courts and prove his innocence?
How someone who producing medical certificates claiming mental incapacity to stand trial suddenly after NRO Jab become so healthy to fit lead the country?
I'm not defending any politician, but the system. You're problem is that you think b/c politicians are bad therefore system should be destroyed. And what you don't understand is when you have no functioning system thn anarchy follows. That is why Pakistan is where it stands today. So, let the system work.
As for the courts & Zardari, the man spent 11 years in jail, and he was never convicted of single crime.
Also, British and Swiss laws do not apply to Pakistan. Swiss are refusing to open cases against him because as a head of sate he has immunity from prosecution.
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
A very good article quoting previous case law from Pakistan and India on constitutional amendments.
I'm not defending any politician, but the system. You're problem is that you think b/c politicians are bad therefore system should be destroyed. And what you don't understand is when you have no functioning system thn anarchy follows. That is why Pakistan is where it stands today. So, let the system work.
As for the courts & Zardari, the man spent 11 years in jail, and he was never convicted of single crime.
Also, British and Swiss laws do not apply to Pakistan. Swiss are refusing to open cases against him because as a head of sate he has immunity from prosecution.
Excuse me sir, you have forgotten that most of the cases was not allowed to reach to natural conclusion, and defendant and very much part of that (they have been regularly declaring themselves sick and keeping getting adjournments.
On other side there is big difference between, acquittal and not being convected due to incompletion of cases. In case of conviction he might have claim to minus time spent in jail but this nation still needed a results.
Come to applicability of swiss law, corruption is corruption no matter where you see. The moment once claim that Pakistani judiciary is bias against "mr 10 percent" then at least British and swiss courts are natural place where we could see the truth.
By the way do you have any comment about your beloved leaders case regarding so called " Surry Mahal", they were always denying any ownership of this property in Pakistan as well as British courts only after being washed by NRO soap he claimed ownership and took all the money.
To me he already convected in this case............................
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
Once I meet an Honourable ex-judge of Supreme court and leading light of lawyers moment.
He told me that if Justice Iftikhar reinstated (it was before reinstatement), would not mean a new dawn but just a light at end of tunnel as even justice Iftikhar also was tainted by taking oath under Musharraf.
To me that is perfect description of today’s situation, no matter how imperfect it is, but together with vibrant media it is still providing us some sort of check and balance on excesses of administration.
Just take recent constitutional amendments:-
At one head these leaders preaching lesson of democracy to everyone, but there is no longer requirement internal election within party.
On top of this we have parliament elected by peoples but a this constitutional amendment has empowered a party head (not necessarily elected) to send any member of parliament home. Excuse me are we talking about democracy or some else here?????????????
I am sure these amendments are against common sense and insult of Pakistani electorates who send the member in parliament. I am sure these would shot down in the court of law.
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
Another good article on the matter.
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\04\22\story_22-4-2010_pg1_2
Zardari enjoys constitutional indemnity: SHC
KARACHI: A division bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Wednesday dismissed a petition challenging the eligibility of President Asif Ali Zardari.
The SHC bench consisting of SHC Chief Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmani and Justice Zahid Hamid observed that the 2008 Presidential Election could not be challenged as the president, under the constitution, enjoyed indemnity from court proceedings and could be only removed by impeachment in parliament.
The petition was filed by Maulvi Iqbal Haider Advocate, in which former presidential candidates Justice (r) Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui and Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid Secretary General Mushahid Hussain and the chief election commissioner were also made parties. The petitioner argued that according to the Supreme Court judgement on the National Reconciliation Ordinance, all those cases quashed under the NRO were restored to the position on October 5, 2007.
He submitted that President Zardari was also a beneficiary of the NRO and his nomination papers be re-scrutinised by the Election Commission of Pakistan, as the cases against the president stand revived after the SC judgement. The court, after hearing the arguments, dismissed the petition. app
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
Although Zardari enjoys constitutional immunity, but it is still matter of Supreme court, the US supreme court made two diffrent decisions on question of Bill Clinton.
It held Bill Clinton presidential immunity in the matter of Monica Lewinsky, but in the matter of PAULA JONES as events taken place before him becoming President it declined immunity thus forced President Clinton to go for an out of court settlement.
So Zardari could not prosecuted for his actions at during his time as president of Pakistan, but crime committed prior court might interpret differently.
High court is not right forum to interpret the constitution, it is job of supreme court of Pakistan. I would not surprise if Supreme court decided to examine the issue as and when someone decided to challenge it.
After all there are issues Supreme court need to examine arising from 18th amendents:-
I am sure one could have sympathy with parliamentary role with appointment of judges, but no one with any common sense could except 2-4).
We are in for interesting time now.
Well said :k:
Re: CJ confrontational on 18th Amendment?
238.Amendment of Constitution
Subject to this Part, the Constitution may be amended by Act of [255][Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)].
[256]
239.Constitution Amendment Bill
(1) A Bill to amend the Constitution may originate in either House and, when the Bill has been passed by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House, it shall be transmitted to the other House.
(2) If the Bill is passed without amendment by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House to which it is transmitted under clause (1), it shall, subject to the provisions of clause (4), be presented to the President for assent.
(3) If the Bill is passed with amendment by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House to which it is transmitted under clause (1), it shall be reconsidered by the House in which it had originated, and if the Bill as amended by the former House is passed by the latter by the votes of not less than two-thirds of its total membership it shall, subject to the provisions of clause (4), be presented to the President for assent.
(4) A Bill to amend the Constitution which would have the effect of altering the limits of a Province shall not be presented to the President for assent unless it has been passed by the Provincial Assembly of that Province by the votes of not less than two-thirds of its total membership.
(5) No amendment of the Constitution shall be called in question in any court on any ground whatsoever.
(6) For the removal of doubt, it is hereby declared that there is no limitation whatever on the power of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) to amend any of the provisions of the Constitution.
It held Bill Clinton presidential immunity in the matter of Monica Lewinsky, but in the matter of PAULA JONES as events taken place before him becoming President it declined immunity thus forced President Clinton to go for an out of court settlement.
So Zardari could not prosecuted for his actions at during his time as president of Pakistan, but crime committed prior court might interpret differently.
You're confusing criminal and civil law. They work differently. Paula Jones was suing Clinton in civil matter where she was holding him responsible for sexual harassment. In criminal matter, its the state that prosecutes individual. In Lewinsky's case Clinton was impeached, but he was never convicted for laying to federal prosecutors.
You're confusing criminal and civil law. They work differently. Paula Jones was suing Clinton in civil matter where she was holding him responsible for sexual harassment. In criminal matter, its the state that prosecutes individual. In Lewinsky's case Clinton was impeached, but he was never convicted for laying to federal prosecutors.
When sexual harassment become decriminalized, in any case Is this your position that presidential immunity for civil matter not for criminal?
Then my problem is solves as corruption and money laundering is still a criminal matter (to the best of my understanding).
In any case if a constitution amendment allow looters and criminal to play with destiny of our country it should bound to be shot down by court using its inherent right of interpretation of constitution.
Recently we can our believed honest and transparent government given a contract of LNG also taken up by CJ in excess of 1 US$ 1 billion without a proper bidding in the name of national interests.
We are relatively immature democracy, and everyone civil servant, legislator, government and judges are somehow crossing lines.
But when come CJ action, Zardari has done nothing to enhance his image and at least if one give free hand he would loot whatever left of Pakistan, due to this reason (whatever real intention of CJ and media), they are doing good job by putting fear of god in those corrupts peoples.
As i mentioned earlier a comment by someone part of lawyers moment, that this CJ is also product of same system and he also compromised (taken an oath under PCO at first instance), his reinstatement is not a dawn but light at end of tunnel.
Everyone including CJ has to go home one day, but by that time we have independent judicatory, and mature political class to and sensible media to help us to move in next level.
Insha Allah
You're confusing criminal and civil law. They work differently. Paula Jones was suing Clinton in civil matter where she was holding him responsible for sexual harassment. In criminal matter, its the state that prosecutes individual. In Lewinsky's case Clinton was impeached, but he was never convicted for laying to federal prosecutors.
By Aitizaz Ahsen's position is president is immune of prosecution limited to criminal cases not civil cases.
It means if I have civil claim against him for $ 100.00, i can sue him and there is no immunity for this, but on other side if he committed 100 murders as long as he is president he could not be prosecuted.
Do you really see common sense on this.
I do see it, it was unthinkable at time of drafting this that any criminal could become MP not to talk about President but now times are changed.
All apologetics of Zardari could talk about presidential immunity, i challenge you guys to stand up and tell this nation that all charges are false, and he is innocent if you could.
All apologetics of Zardari could talk about presidential immunity, i challenge you guys to stand up and tell this nation that all charges are false, and he is innocent if you could.
Under the universal standards of justice he has assumption of innocence until proven guilty, and burden of proof is on those who accuse him of crimes. Accusation does not equals quilt.
Under the universal standards of justice he has assumption of innocence until proven guilty, and burden of proof is on those who accuse him of crimes. Accusation does not equals quilt.
So here we come back to same issue, why not let him face the trail get over with it????
He has been hiding behind false medical certificates for past 11 years. and not so called immunity.
His conduct always been less then honest, he do not trust Pakistani courts and running away for courts in Switzerland and UK previously on medical ground and now so called immunity.
Are you sure his conduct is clean and honest???????????????
Under the universal standards of justice he has assumption of innocence until proven guilty, and burden of proof is on those who accuse him of crimes. Accusation does not equals quilt.
Would you entrust your daughters or sisters life with a person of shoddy character on account of his non convictions?
Yet willing to entrust of life of 170 million on the same guy.
Zaradari has serious issues to answer, as soon as he clear these and i would be more then happy to call him my leader (till that the question would never go away).
Even if the allegations against him are false (i am sure some are created by Nawaz's henchman of the time), there is still enough material against him to explain. Sooner he do better for everyone.
I havent read the whole article. No time & energy. But whatever I understand from this...... I think I understand his concern as through out the years, we have seen that there have not been many cases of a 'freely elected president' by the people of Pakistan. Even in cases when it happened (ZAB), still it was actually the military (read foreign) rule in action in reality. So I completely understand his concern as the anti Pakistan foreign elements can bring any T, D, H to power as a president to rule over the people of Pakistan (as has always happened during the entire history of Pakistan) & play any way he likes (as per the foreign instructions he receives) with the constitution & judiciary of Pakistan (as it has happened before).
We can avoid such a possibility though, only if we make our judiciary & legal system so strong that would leave no chance for any foreign elements to play havoc with our internal affairs through using our own laws & law makers. We can do this by strictly following the laws ourselves. NO ONE must be above the law. NO ONE must be allowed to play with the consittution of Pakistan, neither external nor internal forces. NOT EVEN THE PRESIDENT!!!