Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
I think MQM were caught off guard by PPP by sending the bill to NA. By abstaining they kept options open. If there is peace in Swat they will say look we didnt oppose it if it goes wrong then they didnt support it. I think same was the case with CJ restoration, thats why Babar Ghauri came up with that ridiculous statement and then MQM had to do a u turn next day.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Call me crazy but there seems to be something cooking in UAE. COAS is there, Asfand Yar Wali is there, Nawaz is there, Musharaf is there, Zardari is there and CJ is in close vicinity as well in Saudi. Hardly co incidental if you ask me.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
here we go:
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
^^^Whats wrong in that???
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
To quote myself:
We have validated a legal system that was not framed by the elected representatives of the area or the country, but by people who [The News International: Latest News Breaking, World, Entertainment, Royal News"]said([
can you tell me what ‘sharia’ it is thats been imposed in the area? could the lawmakers who voted yes tell us? No. Is it the same sharia the country with the exception of a few hardened nuts condemned, and said no no this is not Islam.
If one cares about democracy at all, we need to understand that this is a bad blow to whatever democratic norms we have. Laws are supposed to come from elected representatives. Not from surrender to a bunch of thugs with guns.
It is truly a shame that more people did not stand up against this.](
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
^^ If your validate legal system is opt to back powerful and beat weak.. Fazullah kind of people will emerge.. . want to kill Fazullah and his thugs... apply and back Justice in you area.. people will not fall for them...
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
^ people used to say the same about the recently departed dictator Musharraf.
Yes we have an inept legal system. And yes we should expect much more from our lawmakers. That does not mean we fail to condemn subversions of the fragile system we have by force, wherever that force originates.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Is it in conflict with the ‘Objectives Resolution’ which is part of the constitution of Pakistan?
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
^^ Whenever their a vacuum, their is some opportunist to take advantage...
This is what Fazulullah & Co is is upto.. they knew that the people are being ignored by the law-makers... from last 60 years.... MNAs and MPAs has became another commodity for making and breaking govt. so they have offered something others only promised... Now i know that Fazullallah struggle's itself is against the Shariah ( as per the ruling of Imam abu Hanifa)...and we both knows it is highly unlikely that any of these courts will accuse him for his misdoings...
So this nizam-e-adl is not going to pay off... all it will give a moral support to the Army ( for starting their next phase of operation) and buy them some time to take care of the thugs in FATA Area...
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Please dont be naive. If it were merely an affirmation of an existing item in the constitution, there would be no need for it.
The resolution wasnt really designed to be a ‘part’ of the constitution, in that it doesnt specify exact laws pertaining to the people, merely provides guidelines for the creation of a constitution. We have a constitution, i.e. that of 1973 with all the modifications by subsequent dictators, which is ostensibly in line with the objectives resolution (which is why it is a valid constitution). therefore specific law are specified through the constitution, not the objective resolution, which is rather vague and aspirational.
And lets look at another clause from the objectives resolution shall we:
Wherein shall be guaranteed fundamental rights including equality of status, of opportunity and before law, social, economic and political justice, and freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association, subject to law and public morality;
Really. Freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association in context of a law which was passed at the behest of people who threatened the lawmakers with death if they thought otherwise.
And most importantly, read the first line:
The Constituent Assembly is to frame laws. If there is any quran or hadis to be interpreted and codified into law, it is the assembly’s job to do it. Not a Qazi sitting and handing out ‘justice’ as he deems fit in accordance with ‘shariah’.. whatever that means.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
^^ Whenever their a vacuum, their is some opportunist to take advantage...
Whenever an oppurtunist does so, we should condemn it.
[quote]
This is what Fazulullah & Co is is upto.. they knew that the people are being ignored by the law-makers... from last 60 years.... MNAs and MPAs has became another commodity for making and breaking govt.
[/quote]
We know the failings of the political class. We always knew it, even when the country was rallying to replace the dictator with the political class. Why? Because if there is any hope, it is that in time the political class may evolve into something worthy of governance. That can only happen if the system is not subverted for atleast some time.
[quote]
so they have offered something others only promised... Now i know that Fazullallah struggle's itself is against the Shariah ( as per the ruling of Imam abu Hanifa)...and we both knows it is highly unlikely that any of these courts will accuse him for his misdoings...
[/quote]
Very good point.
[quote]
So this nizam-e-adl is not going to pay off... all it will give a moral support to the Army ( for starting their next phase of operation) and buy them some time to take care of the thugs in FATA Area...
[/quote]
Lets hope so.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Please dont be naive. If it were merely an affirmation of an existing item in the constitution, there would be no need for it.
And a minor correction. The resolution is not a 'part' of the constitution. The objectives resolution lays down objectives for the subsequent constitution of Pakistan. We have an extant constitution, i.e. that of 1973, which is ostensibly in line with the objectives resolution, therefore laws are specified through the constitution, not the objective resolution.
And lets look at another clause from the objectives resolution shall we:
Wherein shall be guaranteed fundamental rights including equality of status, of opportunity and before law, social, economic and political justice, and freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association, subject to law and public morality;
Really. Freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association in context of a law which was passed at the behest of people who threatened the lawmakers with death if they thought otherwise.
And most importantly, read the first line:
The Constituent Assembly is to frame laws. If there is any quran or hadis to be interpreted and codified into law, it is the assembly's job to do it. Not a Qazi sitting and handing out 'justice' as he deems fit in accordance with 'shariah'.. whatever that means.
Objectives Resolution is a part of constitution. Please confirm that.
I am not talking about what the people who call themselves 'Taliban' are doing. I am just asking if there is anything you find disturbing in the regulation passed in the NA.
The assembly that passed the Regulation IS the constituent assembly. Its job is to frame laws and constitution, and interpretation is the job of courts.
Please read the definition of Qazi in the regulation. It is not one of the regular animal mullahs. They are Judicial Officers (like we have elsewhere) who are competent (trained and qualified at recognized institution) at Shariyah.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
i edited my post. What i should have said was that it wasnt a constitutional document, and it was for the purpose of directing how the constitution should be. it was only included by Zia. As such it does not prescribe specific laws.
I specifically said what I find disturbing in the regulation. There is no specificity as to what it means to implement sharia, and the task of interpreting law in light of quran and hadis, according to the objectives resolution, lies with the assembly.
If that were the case then we would have a complete consitution with the objectives resolution. When we say frame laws, we mean specific laws. Action X will result in penalty X in context of reference X from Quran and Hadis. The job of the courts lies with working with specific rulings derived for Quran and hadis.
Even if that were the case, the judicial officers need to work with specific laws framed by representatives of the people, not a sole person's judgement of the shariah.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
i edited my post. What i should have said was that it wasnt a constitutional document, and it was for the purpose of directing how the constitution should be. it was only included by Zia. As such it does not prescribe specific laws.
I specifically said what I find disturbing in the regulation. There is no specificity as to what it means to implement sharia, and the task of interpreting law in light of quran and hadis, according to the objectives resolution, lies with the assembly.
If that were the case then we would have a complete consitution with the objectives resolution. When we say frame laws, we mean specific laws. Action X will result in penalty X in context of reference X from Quran and Hadis. The job of the courts lies with working with specific rulings derived for Quran and hadis.
Even if that were the case, the judicial officers need to work with specific laws framed by representatives of the people, not a sole person's judgement of the shariah.
Objectives Resolution says we will secure guidance from Quran and Shariyah while making laws. So, we did. in this Regulation. Zia added a lot of other things and so did the subsequent 'rulers' of Pakistan. This does not make the constitution void.
Please read section 6(2) of the Regulation. The procedural implementation is the same as other courts. As long as specific rulings are available in Quran, those would be applied. You can call them barbaric, but that's what it is.
The specific penalties for crimes are given in Pakistan Penal Code which is framed by the NA and the interpretation of those laws are a job of courts. Same is the case with civil law. The Assemblies make laws and courts interpret and apply them.
They cannot use judgment. They have to follow a procedure and apply specific laws, which have already largely been interpreted by Shariyat Bench of Pakistan Supreme Court.
The only thing I am saying and what you also said is that this specific regulation is not much different from existing laws except for three major things:
I do not find the above 'disturbing'.
There were a couple of civil cases my grandfather started against qabza of a piece of his land around 40 years ago and are still in courts and possibly my children would continue them. I would welcome anything that puts a time limit to these things.
As far as implementation of these regulations is concerned, I have my reservations as yours.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Sufi muhammed just declared that taliban are not subject to qazi courts. Enjoy your "sharia"
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
[quote]
[/quote]
It does not. The point however is that the objectives resolution was made for spelling out what the consitution should be like. The NA should seek guidance from Quran and Sunnah in framing laws, it should not pass the buck onto the Qazies.
[quote]
[/quote]
The more specific ruling about what the Qazies will be doing is in section 9. It is not limited to the Quran, but Quran, Hadis, Ijma, Qiyas and so on. We know how contentious those sources are, and it is these contentions that should be settled by the NA.
[quote]
[/quote]
As you say the penal code is overriden here. I doubt very much that Qazi sahab will find the need to refer to penal code when he has the authority (as per section 9) to seek guidance from Quran/Hadis/ijma/reputable faqih (Sufi Mohammad maybe?) for the purpose of settling matters.
[quote]
[/quote]
Could you tell me where specifically its said that the laws need to be applied as interpreted by the Pakistan supreme court? Its a lot of text to read through.
[quote]
The only thing I am saying and what you also said is that this specific regulation is not much different from existing laws except for three major things:
[/quote]
Re point number 2, isnt that a subversion of the constitution. the penal code according to the objectives resolution is already inline with Quranic injunctions. Therefore the only reason to differ from it must reside in a difference of opinion about whether or not the penal code conflicts with Quranic injunctions. That determination should be done by the national and provincial assemblies.
[quote]
There were a couple of civil cases my grandfather started against qabza of a piece of his land around 40 years ago and are still in courts and possibly my children would continue them. I would welcome anything that puts a time limit to these things.
[/quote]
The systemic problems that exist will persist regardless of this agreement. There is much to be fixed in Pakistan, but not at the barrel of a gun, and not with lawmakers threatened with death if they disagree.
[quote]
As far as implementation of these regulations is concerned, I have my reservations as yours.
[/quote]
Good atleast we agree there.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Penal code is not already in line with Islamic injunctions. Do you see thieves getting their hands cut off?
As I said, the document is not very controversial. The manner in which it was passed and will be implemented would be very controversial and problematic.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Penal code is not already in line with Islamic injunctions. Do you see thieves getting their hands cut off?
Might not be in line in your opinion. But the fact that its part of our legal system with a consitition that expressly says Islamic injunctions need to be catered for suggests that atleast the judiciary doesnt feel the conflict too severe.
I believe the framing of the resolution leaves some leevay for penalties to be different.
[quote]
As I said, the document is not very controversial. The manner in which it was passed and will be implemented would be very controversial and problematic.
[/quote]
I disagree with your former statement. I think the document enables a situation that can only go one way. It was passed the wrong way, for the wrong reasons, and will be implemented by the wrong people.
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
Does anyone know what will happen to soldiers from malakand and swat who go back to their homes? Will they be tried by the Qazi courts and beheaded for waging war against the mujahideen?
Re: MQM walks out from Swat deal NA vote [merged]
So whoever thinks that MQM should have agreed on swat deal,
plz raise your hand.
else what are we complaining about? Shouldn't we complained about those who agreed to it?