Re: Pakistan’s top judge is suspended
And here is what the “unwashed masses” think of the decision. God forbid we listen to them.
http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\03\11\story_11-3-2007_pg7_30
Lahoris displeased with how chief justice was suspended
By Afnan Khan and Rana Kashif
LAHORE: People expressed shock over the removal of Justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry as the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
Citizens from different walks of life were talking to Daily Times during a survey conducted in different markets and public places of the city on Saturday.
The people hailed the services of the chief justice saying it was a difficult job to think for people during a military regime.
A 45-year-old businessman, Shaharyar Kirmani, said that removal of the chief justice in such a disgraceful way was a slap on the face of democracy and rule of law. They said it was one of the worst abuses of power by a military dictator.
He added that the CJP had pro-public stance on the kite-flying issue. “He had also ordered to end the flow of spurious drugs and implement the anti-tobacco law,” Kirmani said.
He said that what justice could a commoner expect in a system where the highest judicial authority himself had been denied justice for taking up public issues.
Zubaida Paul, a 39-year-old housewife, said that the incident had tarnished the rule of law and a military dictator had proved that no one could expect law from an unconstitutional ruler. She said that Justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry had engraved his name as a hero in the history of judiciary by taking up stand against the anti-women customs like karo-kari and vani.
She said that she had done MA/LLB and believed that Iftikhar Chaudhry was still the chief justice under the Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan. She said the incident had tarnished the judicial history of the country.
Mohammad Aftab, a shopkeeper, stated that President General Pervez Musharraf took the right decision by taking action against a higher authority, who was accused of corruption and misuse of power. He said that everyone must be accountable of his or her deeds.
A cloth merchant in the Ichhra market said that he had tried his best to get his son recruited in the government service as a clerk but did not do so as he could not fulfil the merit criteria. He said it was quite unjust for a higher authority to place his son in a civil services’ department.
Another shopkeeper, Rana Shahzad, asserted that the sacking of the CJP was shameful. He spoke of the grounds of the expulsion, and said the alleged choppers, jets or Mercedez Benz that the Justice had obtained were nothing extra-ordinary for someone of such high status, and not worth throwing someone out over.
A 36-years-old doctor, Shahida Ikram said, that the removal of chief justice indicated that Musharraf was trying to prolong his regime indefinitely. She said that though the people disliked the act but they were simply “powerful enough to shed crocodile’s tears for a few days and keep mum forever.”
She said that the chief justice had pro-public stances over incidents like the privatisation of Pakistan Steel Mills, warning to the government to stop killings due to the basant celebrations, and demanded that the government recover information regarding missing people.
He said that if that was the criteria of judging the corruption then every politician and higher official could be suspended on such allegations. He said that the portfolio of a Chief Justice was quite a high calibre job and he also needed security and protocol, which most of the common ministers always enjoyed and wanted. Another housewife, Shaista Salman, was of the view that Naeem Bukhari had played a notorious rule by becoming part of the conspiracy. She further said that she used to take Bukhari as an honest anchorperson and a good lawyer but could not imagine that one day he would play into the establishment like that. She said that the allegations could be levelled many months earlier but could not understand why Bukhari realised that he should write such a letter right ahead of the upcoming general polls.
A 55-years-old retired public servant, Mirzal Mahmood Aslam, stated that the removal of the chief justice was to get rid of the ‘unreliable’ people who could create hindrance in the way of General Musharraf’s adventures with the constitution of the country and the judicial system ahead of the announced general elections.
He said that the campaign would continue further and those who stood in the way of restoring so-called democracy would face the same fate. A 68-years-old retired professor, Dilawar Malik, said that the incident had proved that things were never going to change in the country and we would have to continue our endeavours to hide our history from the next generation due to its clumsiness and notoriety.
A 33-years-old artist named Naved Alam said that the incident was a clear warning to those who wanted to bring change in the country. He said that it might be written in this country’s fate to remain the centre of controversies and shelter for dictators.
http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\03\11\story_11-3-2007_pg7_10
Overwhelming majority against ‘sacking’ of CJP
PESHAWAR: ‘Overwhelming’ public opinion is in favour of suspended chief justice of Pakistan and 95 percent of people, including traders, students, farmers, retired army men, public transporters, doctors and teachers, have condemned his sacking. According to the results of a survey conducted by Daily Times in Peshawar city to gauge public opinion over President Pervez Musharraf’s decision to remove Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry from the post of chief justice of Pakistan, 95 percent people disapproved of the action, terming it “illegal”. From the remaining five percent, two percent, mostly labourers, expressed ignorance about the new development and three percent said that it was a legal issue and they were not ‘qualified’ for commenting over it. A majority of the people also didnot believe the reason - abuse of power - forwarded by the government for suspension of the chief justice and thought that the real reasons were the cancellation of Pakistan Steel Mills privatisation and the ban on Basant festival. When contacted, Saddar Bazzar Traders Union President Haji Shaukat Shah said, “It is known to everyone that the chief justice is facing the consequences of not complying with orders of President Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz.” “If government ministers can get luxury cars and SUVs for their own use, the judges also have a right to use these vehicles,” Shah said. A retired army officer, on condition of anonymity, said, “The general (President Musharraf) wants a Yes man and the chief justice was not of that sort,” he said, adding that he was being penalised for being honest. Saeed Gul, a Peshawar Law College student, said that the president’s action had no legality, as “the Constitution’s Article 209 does not permit him to suspend chief justice of Pakistan”. “It is a condemnable act,” he said. A number of other law college students expressed strong resentments over the suspension of the chief justice. A farmer, Ali Muhammad, from Pishtakhara village said, “Such an action against an honest judge is really condemnable”. Khan Wali, a taxi driver in Saddar Bazaar, said that Justice Chaudhry was a “bold and honest man” as he had read about a number of his bold decision in the newspaper. “Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry restored people’s confidence in the judiciary,” he said. akhtar amin
http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\03\11\story_11-3-2007_pg7_9
People reject suspension
By Irfan Ghauri and Shahzad Malik
ISLAMABAD: An overwhelming majority of public on Saturday showed their resentment towards the filing of a reference against Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, saying that the action was based on “mala fide” intentions.
According to the results of a survey conducted by Daily Times in the city, majority of the people also wanted accountability of top government leaders, cabinet members and military officials. People contacted in the survey included businessmen, students, vendors, teachers, policemen and housewives and among them, only a small group supported the action, while others said that they were unaware of the action.
Safdar Mir, a businessman, said, “A general has no authority to summon a chief justice and to keep him in custody for six hours. There is no such precedent anywhere in the civilised world.” Referring to the charges against Justice Chaudhry, he said that they were “baseless”. “Who is not using protocol? Even a senior superintendent of police (SSP) keeps several official vehicles for his personnel use. I can show you six official cars that are in the use of a secretary-level bureaucrat.”
Imran Malik, a banker, said, “Why does our prime minister, who recommended action against Justice Chaudhry, not take any action against his cabinet members for their involvement in corruption?” He said that the move was meant for postponing the elections. “Many important cases are pending with the apex court and bold decisions were expected in the coming few weeks. How could a general tolerate stern action against secret agencies in the expected SC verdict on missing persons’ case?” he asked.
Malik appreciated the Supreme Court’s decision in the steel mills privatisation case, the ban on kite flying and summoning police and bureaucracy in suo moto actions taken by the chief justice. He said that the people held Justice Chaudhry in high esteem due to his public interest verdicts. Shaukat Abbasi, a restaurant worker, said that the real issues facing the people were price-hikes and lawlessness and not the action against Justice Chaudhry.
His fellow waiter, Saleem said, “Most people here in our restaurant say it was a wrong decision. Judiciary should be independent. I earlier read in a newspaper that the chief justice had fined the NWFP government for not granting admission to the son of a watchman who deserved it on merit.”
Ali Imran, a salesman, said, “Who has given a general the authority to sack a chief justice? He summoned the chief justice and held him under house arrest. He was not allowed to hire a lawyer?”
Mohsin Bashir, a chemist, said: “If he (Justice Chaudhry) was not corrupt, he should return. I am not sure if the allegations were right or not, but if he was honest it (his suspension) is unjustified.”
Samiullah, a vender, said that he was unaware of the issue and was only concerned about earning his living. Nasir Ahmed, a taxi driver, said that he did not know anything about the chief justice or his personal conduct, so it will be unfair for him to give any statement. However, he supported the military government saying, “At least the military governments survive for a few years as opposed to civilian governments”.
Muhammad Raza Khan, a photocopier operator, said that the news had “shocked” him, as Justice Chaudhry’s decisions were in “public interest” and he was popular.
Bushra Hameed and Noshaba, two business administration students, said that the chief justice should have been given a “fair chance” to explain his position.
Atif Rasheed, another student, said, “If the action was according to the constitution, it is right, otherwise not. But first of all, charges against the chief justice should have been proved before suspending him.”
Muhammad Usman, a university student, said, “Are the president and the prime minister not misusing their authority? At least 30 Islamabad police’s cars are used for their protocol?” Some other students: Asad Abbass, Adnan, Shazia, Fawad, Umbrene, Sana and Fatima, also expressed similar views.
Mumtaz Begum, Mehwish Saeed, Samina Khalid, Wafa Sadiq, who are housewives, opposed the move and said that their sympathies were with Justice Chaudhry.
Qazi Younas, the member of a reconciliatory committee, said that he supported the government’s decision, stating the president had the authority to carry out any such action.
