Re: Pakistan's top judge is suspended (Merged)
so he has issues with the majority of the 5 judges. that is very telling. and whether someone is on talking terms or not, is teh CJ convinced thatthis person will put personal gain above what is right? and if that is a concern he has had then he needed to move to disallow this judge from being in the position that he is. Or is a biased self serving judge okay for public issues but not when your own ass is on the line?
How is the CJ to oust another CJ just becuz they are not on talking terms.
Well lets see, when these references were recieved and what he did with them. The fact of the matter is that until these references were reviewed and resolved these folks would be in their positions. Whether they were looking at cases of general awaam, or some cheeta.
Going by this line of argument, the CJP should not have been suspended. If his suspension was right, then these judges should also be suspended. If it wasn't then CJP should be restored. If he is to be sent on forced leave for what he's allegedly done, then more than half of Pakistan should be on leave right now, including our great savior and the people hearing his case.
Intriguingly enough the very judges against whom references r pending restrained the CJP from performing his duties. I smell a contradiction.
in your own post referring to CJ, you said innocent until proven guilty. Sure I agree 100% CJ is innocent until proven guilty although evidence of arrassment of media indicates that he is not but thats for the council to decide.
There's even more damaging evidence against some of the judges. Its in the papers. I am sure u have read it.
By the same token however the other judges are innocent, even if there are references filed against them which are under review..if they are under review at all. Since they are also innocent until proven guilty then they are free to review his case. If the references against them pain such huge issues that they can not review cases while the references are being reviewed then they should not have been in a position to be reviewing any cases, whether they are for avg joes or for CJ Ifti.
Sure they r innocent until proven guilty but the fact that there were cases against them in front of the judge who they are now going to be judging themselves brings in an element of bias which is why there seat on the SJC is contentious. No conspiracy theories behind it.