“all nation stood by CHIEF JUSTICE during his case and now its SUPREME COURT’s DUTY to join hands with the nation…” (basically what he is saying its PAY BACK TIME for SUPREME COURT)
Question is that when supreme court’s izzat is so nazuk k ministers k interviews per kharab ho jatee hai and they are served with contempt of court notices, isnt this a contempt of court? asking supreme court to side with some party coz that party sided with supreme court? Why is he not served the notice by our beloved chief justice?
I guess CJ will let him go just like he let go his lawyer MUNIR A MALIK when he gave a threat to burn the supreme court and the same way he let go his lawyer HAMID on his speech in which he said that “if supreme court did not give decision in CJ’s favor, justices will not be able to go home” … double standards CJ ! double standards !
How is that "contempt of court"? Can you put here what the law regarding "Contempt of law" states? Aalsi ko to bolnay ka bahana chahiye chahay jhoota hi kewn na ho.
How is that "contempt of court"? Can you put here what the law regarding "Contempt of law" states? Aalsi ko to bolnay ka bahana chahiye chahay jhoota hi kewn na ho.
1-204. Contempt of Court.-(1) In this Article, "Court" means the Supreme Court or High Court.
(2) A Court shall have power to punish any person who,-
(a) abuses, interferes with or obstructs the process of the Court in any way or disobeys any order of the Court;
(b) scandalizes the Court or otherwise does anything which tends to bring the Court or a Judge of the Court into hatred, ridicule or contempt;
(c) does anything which tends to prejudice the determination of a matter pending before the Court; or
(d) does any other thing which, by law, constitutes contempt of the Court.
(3) The exercise of the power conferred on a Court by this Article may be regulated by law and, subject to law, by rules made by the Court.]
Having said it all, I don't want the strict implementation of the contempt of law but then it should be lenient with both parties and not with one party!
QAZI SAHAB is clearly scandalized the court by asking for a "PAY BACK". What does he thinks of the court, his statement will only make normal person think that court takes sides .... :)
Having said it all, I don't want the strict implementation of the contempt of law but then it should be lenient with both parties and not with one party!
QAZI SAHAB is clearly scandalized the court by asking for a "PAY BACK". What does he thinks of the court, his statement will only make normal person think that court takes sides .... :)
I agree with that completely. However Shamraz has a point.
Amongst all politicians in opposition: Imran has lowest political IQ followed by Nawaz. BB has highest political IQ followed by Fazlu. As for Qazi, there is no instrument yet discovered to measure Qazi's political IQ, as science is amazed to find that a person can still be walking around in politics with untraceable political IQ.
"....people thought that supreme court has been freed but i dont know why they rejected our request to have full court for the current trial....."
another contempt of court...... is he saying that supreme court is not free or in other words its biased? ... QAZI SAHAB satya gaeey hain coz observations from judges during trial are not very hopeful for him at the moment although we dont know what will be the final verdict yet !
Amongst all politicians in opposition: Imran has lowest political IQ followed by Nawaz. BB has highest political IQ followed by Fazlu. As for Qazi, there is no instrument yet discovered to measure Qazi's political IQ, as science is amazed to find that a person can still be walking around in politics with untraceable political IQ.
It would be interesting to note your say on Altaf Bhai and Gen. Musharraf. :)
The All Pakistan Democratic Movement (APDM) decided Friday to launch a “countrywide struggle” leading to the resignations of their MNAs and MPAs from the national and provincial assemblies on the 29th of September against the scheduled re-election of President General Pervez Musharraf on the 6th of October. This is a significant decision since the APDM “protest” has also been lodged in the Supreme Court asking it to disqualify the president from being re-elected.A component of the APDM also held a “protest” rally in front of the Supreme Court with placards condemning the Doctrine of Necessity. In normal conditions, such a “protest” against the “past” conduct of the judiciary would have been viewed with distaste. Qazi Hussain Ahmad, who addressed the protest rally, said that it was not a pressure tactic but was of a piece with the rally held by the lawyers and the political parties when the case of the dismissal of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was being heard. The rally yesterday had people carrying a coffin with “Doctrine of Necessity” written on it, implying that the honourable court should not revert to its old pattern of servile conduct.
**This must have looked odd to many people who are sticklers for decorum when a case is sub judice. Such protest rallies in front of the Court can be interpreted as pressure tactics to “influence” the decision of the judges on the bench. **Perhaps the lawyer who presented the APDM case before the honourable bench was better placed to raise the point of the Court’s past. He referred to the martial laws of the past which the Court had permitted under the Doctrine, thus allowing legitimacy to military rule in Pakistan. He insisted that the Court rescind the decisions earlier taken and issue fresh orders invalidating certain decisions taken by parliament with a two-thirds majority. There is no doubt that the Court can “review” its earlier decisions, but to ask that the Court rescind the 17th Amendment militates against the traditional conduct of the Court based on the letter of the law. For the sake of clarification, an honourable judge of the bench asked how the Court could set aside a constitutional amendment made on the basis of a “deal” among the politicians. The journey from the “text” of the Constitution to its “context” now demanded by the politicians is too big a stride for any institution to take. As this exchange took place inside the Court, the protest rally outside the Court looked most incongruous. Earlier, too, the “pressure” aspects of the lawyers’ movement had come to the notice of some legal experts. While arguing the case against the dismissal of the Chief Justice, lawyers representing the highest legal body in the country had issued threats to the Court which were most unbecoming of the community they represent. As the intensity of the lawyers’ commitment to the case increased, there were incidents of intimidation and physical beatings to fellow lawyers who were not completely in agreement with the “movement”. Because not much attention was paid to the lack of decorum involved in these incidents, a cleavage in the profession has inevitably developed, which is unfortunate.
Once again QAZI SAHAB opened his mouth and did serious contempt of court in GEO's interview on the verdict. lets see if our BELOVED CJ takes somoto action just like he did for Sher Afghan and Wasi Zafar. HEre are some of the main points that Qazi Sahab said
Main un teen (3) judges ko mubarakbaad daita hoon jinhoon nai faisley sai inheraf keya or MERIT per faisla keya - Contempt of court once again
Jin judges nai musharraf k haq main faisla deya hai uss main un ka APNA MAFAAD AUR FAIDA jura howa hai - serious contempt of court once again - he is saying that judges ruled in favor of Mush coz of their own interest
Hum tu samjhey theey k ADLIYA AAZAD HO GAEE HAI - once again contempt of court
he said so many thing which i dont rem right now ...will bring to you guys.
All political fighting apart, shouldnt CJ take notice of QAZI's statements for heaven sake?
Once again QAZI SAHAB opened his mouth and did serious contempt of court in GEO's interview on the verdict. lets see if our BELOVED CJ takes somoto action just like he did for Sher Afghan and Wasi Zafar. HEre are some of the main points that Qazi Sahab said
Main un teen (3) judges ko mubarakbaad daita hoon jinhoon nai faisley sai inheraf keya or MERIT per faisla keya - Contempt of court once again
Jin judges nai musharraf k haq main faisla deya hai uss main un ka APNA MAFAAD AUR FAIDA jura howa hai - serious contempt of court once again - he is saying that judges ruled in favor of Mush coz of their own interest
Hum tu samjhey theey k ADLIYA AAZAD HO GAEE HAI - once again contempt of court
he said so many thing which i dont rem right now ...will bring to you guys.
All political fighting apart, shouldnt CJ take notice of QAZI's statements for heaven sake?
in pak, everything is linked to interests…who gives a damn about law/rule…i know mushy doesn’t give a **** about law/rules/judiciary…so if opposition is playing by his rules then why are u moaning…if SC/CJ think its contempt of court then i’m sure he’ll take the necessary action if not then too bad… :halo:
:halo: