[quote=GoldenAsif;5473344 Pakistan’s only Supreme Court Judge ever to be recognised internationally and given the highest judicial award by Harvard :k: History will surely remember him with sunehray haroof [/quote]
Mashallah. I hope he also gets a Nobel Prize for taking the Oath on PCO and rubber stamping President Musharaf’s rule. Without the EX CJ Pakistan would not have seen the Unprecedented Growth under the Great Leadership of President Musharaf. :k:
How can one forget disgraced X-CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry :D. All corrupts and goons of Pakistan (plus surely some misguided too) were behind him, still this man could not hold his office. It seems, that corrupts and goons are loosing their power hold over Pakistan.
What I understand is that, when a decision is made by SC 'giving short order 'than detail reasons for their decision has to come within 3 months, else such decision by SC becomes invalid.
‘Supreme Court’ in their 20th of July short order stopped ‘Supreme Judicial Council’ to investigate the reference on X-CJ but withheld detail reasons for that. The decision was given on 20th of July and thus reasons should have come before 20th of October. Unfortunately SC did not come up with detailed reasons for their rulings (even though disgraced X-CJ was holding his office until 3 Nov 2007). SC also gave short order without reason regarding suspension of X-CJ but did not come up with detail reasons. Hence it seems that rulings by SC on 20th of July related to disgraced X-CJ, are all invalid judgments.
Here is abstract from arguments by Pirzada in SC, as given below in the article:
The statement above: ‘Judicial review should be judicial and should not be used to intrude into the domain of other branches of the government’ is very important. It is because, if they intrude, mayhem follows and result comes with disgracing of Judiciary sacking of judges, that is not good for Judiciary and Judges. Army also intrude but army has military power behind them to stand that intrusion, not judges, so judges should be careful in their intrusion.
No doubt, judges should give justice to the people and make sure that no one in the country on their individual capacity harms the rights and interfere in the life of other citizens, but once judges starts conflicts within the state and starts interfering with the ruling of the country, poking their nose beyond their capacity, they should not complain when others comes against them with all force.
‘Court order on deposed CJ has lost its efficacy’ By Nasir Iqbal
ISLAMABAD, Nov 21: Defending President Pervez Musharraf’s proclamation of the state of emergency, senior counsel Sharifuddin Pirzada argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the court’s short order restoring deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry in July had lost its efficacy because the detailed verdict was not issued within three months.
The validation of Nov 3 emergency by Gen Musharraf was one of the pleadings of the counsel who advised the court to confer all powers to the army as it had done in the 2000 Zafar Ali Shah case.
Petitioner Barrister Zafarullah Khan of the Watan Party and president’s counsel Sharifuddin Pirzada concluded their arguments on Wednesday. Attorney General Malik Muhammad Qayyum was to start his arguments when the court time was over.
** “We have the highest regard for the judiciary because we believe in its independence and hold the judges in highest esteem, but some orders were passed which render the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) ineffective,” Mr Pirzada said in an obvious reference to the July 20 short order of restoring Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry.
The short order was passed, but despite the lapse of three months no detail reasons had been given for obliterating the SJC, he added.
“What will be its effect?” asked Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar who is heading a seven-member bench of the Supreme Court hearing identical petitions challenging the validity of emergency and the Provisional Constitution Order.
“It will lose its efficacy and, therefore, could not be termed as a judgment,” Mr Pirzada referred to his arguments in the Zafar Ali Shah before the then court and said that it had the judicial review, but the power should be exercised with great caution.
“Judicial review should be judicial and should not be used to intrude into the domain of other branches of the government,” he said.**
He said that the current situation was similar to those of 1977 and 1999, adding that the 1977 martial law was validated by the apex court in the Nusrat Bhutto case on the grounds that the Constitution had not been abrogated, though held in abeyance.
In 1985, general elections were held under martial law on non-party basis, while the assemblies indemnified all actions under the Constitutional Eight Amendment and also introduced Article 58 (2b) to prevent martial laws in future.
The counsel said the Nawaz Sharif government had deleted this safety valve through the 13th Amendment and taken drastic actions leading to a very unpleasant situation. “Subsequently emergency was proclaimed which was also validated by the apex court in the Zafar Ali Shah case stating that the armed forces saved the country from disastrous situation.”
Referring to the current situation, he said that half a dozen attempts had been made on the army posts, adversely affecting the country’s defence capability. “The entire country was in the grip of terrorism and extremism,” he said, adding that the prime minister had written a letter to the president after great deliberations against the backdrop of this situation.
He elaborated that while emergency has been imposed once again, the Constitution had not been abrogated and courts were functioning. “The current intervention is for a very limited period so that the country could return to democratic process through elections to be held on January 8, 2008.”
When the court asked him that the army chief, instead of the president, had imposed emergency, Mr Pirzada recalled that only once in Pakistan’s history, martial law had been clamped by President Iskandar Mirza in 1956 by abrogating the Constitution, and though validated by the Supreme Court in the Dosso case, it was subsequently overruled in the Asma Jillani case by passing strictures. “That is why such actions are always taken by the army chief and not by the president,” he argued.
At the outset, the attorney-general conceded that the powers exercised by the army chief on Nov 3 was an extra-constitutional step for which nobody was happy, not even the president or the army chief, but said that in such circumstances, no remedy was available in the Constitution.
He said the Nov 3 emergency had been imposed keeping in view two principles – ‘salus populi suprema lex’ (welfare of the people is the supreme law) and ‘salus republica suprema lex’ (welfare of the republic is the supreme law).
“Is Pakistan more important than democracy?” he asked and said that the circumstance was such that the existence of the state apparatus had been endangered.
“People were running state within state and 1,489 terrorist activities and bomb blasts occurred in the current year and scores of security personnel were killed,” he added.
The AG also criticised the pre-emergency judiciary and said that 500 to 600 suo motu notices had been taken. He said that only one suo motu case was decided by the Supreme Court in 1956 and former chief justice Afzal Zullah took up 40 such cases in 1975. “This was not a judicial activism but judicial ‘excessism’ (sic).”
He dispelled the impression that any proposal was under consideration to take away suo motu powers from the superior judiciary. He said that even the cabinet had been directed by the apex court to consider on a priority basis the human organ transplantation law, take up the road congestion problem in Karachi and fix prices of fruit and vegetables. “How is the function of the cabinet dictated by the apex court?” he asked.
Likewise, he said, the new Murree development and Islamabad chalets projects had been stopped.
“Although the intentions are laudable, this is not the job of the apex court but of the executive branch,” he said.
^ kiss kee aankhon mein dhool jhonk rahay ho. Sharfu is the biggest chamcha or doyee there is. He has sided with every establishment since Bhutto. He is just about as credible as the next lota of PML-Q. So anything he says or writes has little credibility.
^ kiss kee aankhon mein dhool jhonk rahay ho. Sharfu is the biggest chamcha or more aptly doyee there is. He has sided with every establishment since Bhutto. He is just about as credible as the next lota of PML-Q. So anything he says or writes has little credibility.
Brother, isn't it shame of Pakistani psyche that whenever we hear or read something, instead of accepting or rejecting the material on merit with reasons, we straightaway goes to the personality of the individual that said or wrote it? Can't make comments after reading the material and judging the content without looking at who originated it?
Well, forget Pirzada, consider that the above wordings are of Mr Nobody who knows Pakistani laws, than would it make any difference to the truth mentioned above?
[What ever you like about Pirzada or not, you cannot say that he does not know the laws of Pakistan or make statements that are nothing to do with Pakistani laws. Because if he had done that then he would have been loosing cases and no one would have hired him. Another thing to remember is that, contribution of S Pirzada in wordings of 1973 Pakistani constitution is immense, and thus he knows more about spirit of Pakistani constitution than most lawyers and judges in Pakistan].
Wah … You mean that sacked judges of Supreme Court under CJ Iftikhar could have given judgment that BB is wife of Ch Iftikhar without any valid legal reason (maybe because Ch Iftikhar started liking her and persuaded them to give such judgment), and than she would become Ch Iftikhar wife?
Atni bhie tou andhi nahi lagee hay bhai. If detailed reasons within specific time was not a must need, anything can happen.
Alhamdulilallah. The beloved EX CJ should never be forgotten. It is thanks to him by rubber stamping President Musharaf Great Rule, Pakistan has seen Unprecdented Growth, including Free Judiciary and Free Media. :k:
The EX CJ should be nominated for Nobel Prize for his services to Pakistan, and for seeing the light in allowing President Musharaf to lead Pakistan to such great success. :k:
Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar has followed the great example of ex-CJ Iftikhar, i.e. that of making everything technically extra-constitutional, perfectly constitutional. In doing that the ex-CJ must must get some credit for ensuring that the unprecedented economic and developmental growth in Pakistan under the Great Leadership of President Musharaf proceeded without any issues. For these factors alone, the ex-CJ deserves a medal.
Reza few years later, no one will own Musharraf but everyone will be praising CJ, like what happened to all army chief cum presidents of the past, like Ayub and Zia.
Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar has followed the great example of ex-CJ Iftikhar, i.e. that of making everything technically extra-constitutional, perfectly constitutional. In doing that the ex-CJ must must get some credit for ensuring that the unprecedented economic and developmental growth in Pakistan under the Great Leadership of President Musharaf proceeded without any issues. For these factors alone, the ex-CJ deserves a medal. :)
Absolutely right. That's why everyone should work towards making sure the EX CJ gets a Nobel Prize. :)
Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar has followed the great example of ex-CJ Iftikhar, i.e. that of making everything technically extra-constitutional, perfectly constitutional.
What is unconstitutional remains the same. No one can make it "perfectly" constitutional.
CJ's can ACCEPT and UNDERSTAND the unconstitutional steps of a general for various reasons (which is itself unconstitutional), but he can not make them constitutional.
Constitution does not allow for it.
Shame for both ex-CJ and present CJ, and shame for people like you who support dictators, and still show smiley face after the dictators screw their constitutional rights.
Shame for both ex-CJ and present CJ, and shame for people like you who support dictators, and still show smiley face after the dictators screw their constitutional rights.
Prince bhai, it is time to rejoice. Thanks to President Musharaf and his govt. Pakistan has never had it so good. :)
^ how long can Musharraf live? What will happen after him?
Where is the SYSTEM of government in Pakistan?
Are you suggesting VCOAS Kiani will not be able to do a great job? No doubt patriotic people like the EX CJ will not stop the 'never had it so good' spirit of current Pakistan. :)
… You mean that sacked judges of Supreme Court under CJ Iftikhar could have given judgment that BB is wife of Ch Iftikhar without any valid legal reason (maybe because Ch Iftikhar started liking her and persuaded them to give such judgment), and than she would become Ch Iftikhar wife? 
