Hmm .. well, first of all, it was President and Prime Minister both decided (read the news). Prime Minister represents the parliament. Secondly, there was no need for Prime Minister in this case as his presense was extra, because constitution of Pakistan does not ask his need. So before taking President out from making this decision, let the parliament change the constitution. Let any person in future that comes to power change this from constitution. Hope for that day.
As at present, the constitution wording is as under. Read it. Does it says parliament or President (I hope that I am reading right).
As for information comming to president, it came through the letter of Naeem Bukhari. It seems that under the wording of the constitution, president opinion can start investigation and enquiry of a suprene court judge.
(5) If, on information [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court, **
(a) may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or
(b) may have been guilty of misconduct, the President shall direct the Council to, or the Council may, on its own motion,] inquire into the matter.**
I will send him an email and ask him and once he tells me I will inform you. Are you an estate agent?
Nope, but any corrupt dictator worth his salt would have 7 mansions all over the world. That's why I'm asking you to do your research instead of coming to these dubious conclusions. Your suggestion the judiciary should be exempt from the executive might be true, but this is the Chief Justice we're talking about, HE CONTROLS THE JUDICIARY. He has to be accountable to someone, and that someone is the president as declared by the Consitution.
Saleem if he was honest in his approach he would have asked the parliament to separate the judiciary from the executive. Why hasn't he done so far? To say that they both decided is laughable. Everyone knows how much power the PM has. I think I have more power running this site than eh has as PM running Pakistan.
All I am saying is that if he is so bothered about the corruption of the CJ that he had to "suspend" him than their are others around him who need to be investigated as well. Why is he silent?
Nope, but any corrupt dictator worth his salt would have 7 mansions all over the world. That's why I'm asking you to do your research instead of coming to these dubious conclusions. Your suggestion the judiciary should be exempt from the executive might be true, but this is the Chief Justice we're talking about, HE CONTROLS THE JUDICIARY. He has to be accountable to someone, and that someone is the president as declared by the Consitution.
I've already explained it in my post above. Who is the Chief Justice accountable to in the judiciary? Noone is the answer. So at least he is accountable to someone, and that someone is the President of Pakistan. All this should be obvious. Why is it always Pakistanis cannot grasp these basic points? Not everyone in Pakistan is a crook, and the one person who has done wonders for freeing up the media, for generating one of the fastest growing economies in the world, stands accused of abusing his powers when he's constitutionally permitted to act in the way he has even..not even dictatorly.
That is called absolute control or dictatorship. Constitution says CJ is accountable to NA and not President. If there are allegations against CJ, proper procdeure is for NA to meet and use legal means to debate the issue. To have a uniformed President summon a sitting CJ to his house and grill him for hours is shameful.
First of all, President office is not executive office, it is Prime Minister office that is executive office. President office is office of supervision. As you can see, constitution does separate judiciary from executive (that is why there is no mention of parliament or Prime Minister in article 209, part 5 of constitution). And that is how this article 209 of constitution separates the judiciary from executives. Well, it seems that you want judiciary under executive and that is why you wanted the enquiry to be initiated by parliament, but I think that it is best that it is done by President.
As for bothering about corruption of CJ, well, that is the most important office in Pakistan that could effect corruption in the country. If CJ office is held by corrupt person, nothing can stop corruption in the country because it is judiciary that can only stop corruptions as executives only provide means to judiciary for the purpose.
So, if President finds a CJ whose character becomes dubious, he should act immediately and that is what President Musharraf did.
That is called absolute control or dictatorship. Constitution says CJ is accountable to NA and not President. If there are allegations against CJ, proper procdeure is for NA to meet and use legal means to debate the issue. To have a uniformed President summon a sitting CJ to his house and grill him for hours is shameful.
No, it's not called absolute control. It is part of the Constitution of Pakistan. It's been quoted above, bu sa1eem. Try reading it.
*(5) If, on information [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court, *
*(a) may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or
(b) may have been guilty of misconduct, the President shall direct the Council to, or the Council may, on its own motion,] inquire into the matter. *
Someone has to hold the Chief Justice accountable. And that someone CANNOT be the judiciary as they are subordinates.
^^ If there's a reason to arrest such people, then I support it, in fact I cheer it on. I want all potential suicide bombers arrested so that when I'm in pakistan I can go shopping and walk the streets safely without the fear of some radical nut blowing himself up.
Pakistan has a FREE MEDIA. There are no arrests of political opponents common in dictatorships where media is controlled. Disappearances and torture are common of political opponents where there is not a free media in order to silence them. If Musharaff wants to disappear his political opponents the first thing to do is to silence the media, which he hasnt done. Therefore the arrested people must not be political opponents, they must be people that are security risks to Pakistan or some other criminals. That is why most sensible people support these nutjobs being arrested.
Its strange that you come up whole lot of assumptions against people who have disappeared, who have not been charged, whose relatives have been given no information what so ever, who's young children have been stripped naked on streets for protesting (A photo was put on this very forum) and u "assume" that they must be suicide bombers.
I hope that one day you are caught by Paki agencies and kept at an unkown location for some time, and u and ur relatives under go the same torture that these innocent people are going thru.
First of all, President office is not executive office, it is Prime Minister office that is executive office. President office is office of supervision. As you can see, constitution does separate judiciary from executive (that is why there is no mention of parliament or Prime Minister in clause 9, part 5 of constitution). And that is how this clause 9 of constitution separates the judiciary from executives. Well, it seems that you want judiciary under executive and that is why you wanted the enquiry to be initiated by parliament, but I think that it is best that it is done by President.
As for bothering about corruption of CJ, well, that is the most important office in Pakistan that could effect corruption in the country. If CJ office is held by corrupt person, nothing can stop corruption in the country because it is judiciary that can only stop corruptions as executives only provide means to judiciary for the purpose.
So, if President finds a CJ whose character becomes dubious, he should act immediately and that is what President Musharraf did.
Its strange that you come up whole lot of assumptions against people who have disappeared, who have not been charged, whose relatives have been given no information what so ever, who's young children have been stripped naked on streets for protesting (A photo was put on this very forum) and u "assume" that they must be suicide bombers.
I hope that one day you are caught by Paki agencies and kept at an unkown location for some time, and u and ur relatives under go the same torture that these innocent people are going thru.
^^ He wasnt stripped naked. Some fat kid had his pants pulled down. You could see his legs, and to be honest he looked like he deserved it. Some of those pre pubescent brainwashed types can be real irritants, until you pull their pants down in public, then they quickly shut up.
No, it's not called absolute control. It is part of the Constitution of Pakistan. It's been quoted above, bu sa1eem. Try reading it.
*(5) If, on information [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court, *
*(a) may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or *
*(b) may have been guilty of misconduct, the President shall direct the Council to, or the Council may, on its own motion,] inquire into the matter. *
Someone has to hold the Chief Justice accountable. And that someone CANNOT be the judiciary as they are subordinates.
That would be acceptable if under the constitution the PM was the chief executive. At the moment the president has all the powers. Now please don't tell me that he president has no powers. The PM and the assembly is no more than a rubber stamp.
he's actually spot on with what he says. From what I see, you're the one who doesnt have a grasp of the reality if you think the judiciary can control the head of the judiciary.
That would be acceptable if under the constitution the PM was the chief executive. At the moment the president has all the powers. Now please don't tell me that he president has no powers. The PM and the assembly is no more than a rubber stamp.
You accept that the Chief Justice cannot be controlled by the judiciary?
If the answer is yes, WHO would you think he should be accountable to, and why? Is not the President of Pakistan one of the best people to make him accountable to?
^^ He wasnt stripped naked. Some fat kid had his pants pulled down. You could see his legs, and to be honest he looked like he deserved it. Some of those pre pubescent brainwashed types can be real irritants, until you pull their pants down in public, then they quickly shut up.
I think that you are ...a human being that feels happy for a child be beaten up by police. Firstly he was not wearing a pant, he was wearing a shalwar qameez, and a police officer was wagging his danda at him. This child had not comitted any crime.
he's actually spot on with what he says. From what I see, you're the one who doesnt have a grasp of the reality if you think the judiciary can control the head of the judiciary.
If you believe all that than you are more naive than I thought. Peace.
I think that you are a human being that feels happy for a child be beaten up by police. Firstly he was not wearing a pant, he was wearing a shalwar qameez, and a police officer was wagging his danda at him. This child had not comitted any crime.
I wish Allah ... so that you can understand.
He wasnt being beaten by the police. He just had his kameez pulled down. It will teach him not to be such a bonga in front of his elders in future.