Islamabad has turned into warzone

[roadrunner]

Re: Islamabad has turned into warzone

@legbreakgoogly

Ok I’ve clued myself up by reading.

Mushy has gone too far. To suspend a man who refused to bow at the altar of military rule and stood for judicial independence is unacceptable. Mushy has no bigger supporter then me on this forum, but this is just wrong.

Opposing a junta is no reason to be under arrest. The facade of judicial independence and democratic institution building has been exposed.

This is the point. The Chief Justice might have stood for judicial independence to enable him to be the head of a mafia style judiciary, but the questions of concern are probably is it right for a Chief Justice to do all mentioned in the Bokari letter. Here are some extracts.

1. Can you explain why the Supreme Court of Pakistan (of who the Mafia Chief Justice is in charge of) issues clarificatory statements on behalf of the Mafia’s son?
   “I am perturbed that the Supreme Court should issue a clarificatory statement on his behalf.”
   Letter to CJ from Naeem Bokhari - Teeth Maestro

2. Can you explain why Mir Rahman was summoned to the Mafia man’s chambers to discuss the Mafia’s son (Dr. Arselaan), when this should have been left to independent courts without vested interests?
   *“I am perturbed that the Chief Justice should summon Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman to his chambers on Dr. Arsalaan’s account.” *
   Letter to CJ from Naeem Bokhari - Teeth Maestro

3. Can you explain why the Mafia announces one judgement and then writes down others in his records? (Sher Afgan Niazi being one example in the letter)
   *“I am appalled that you announce decisions in Court, while in the written judgment an opposite conclusion is recorded.” *
   *Letter to CJ from Naeem Bokhari - Teeth Maestro *

These are three of the accusations against him in the letter. Could these be the same things Musharraf has begun the inquiry about? If so, can you answer why these instances have arisen, and can you explain the reason why the Chief Justice acted like this in these instances?

Even if Musharraf is proved wrong in the inquiry, he still has the right, and even the constitutional obligation to call an inquiry into these allegations. **But for the last time, this is not a case of judiciary versus Musharraf. This is the Chief Justice of the judiciary versus the Supreme Court Judges. ie. Judiciary versus Judiciary. The independence of the judiciary is maintained by following the Constituitional law to the letter, as Musharraf has done. **