SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

President should have checked substance before moving SJC: SC

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/images/shim.gif

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/images/shim.gif

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/images/shim.gif

By Muhammad Qasim

ISLAMABAD: **The Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that President Pervez Musharraf should have checked whether the reference he was forwarding to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had enough substance to move the SJC.
**
Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman Ramday observed this while hearing the chief justice’s petition against the presidential reference along with 22 other identical petitions already clubbed. The chief justice, the Pakistan Bar Council, the Supreme Court Bar Association and many provincial bar associations are included on the list of petitioners against the reference.

The 13-member full court, headed by Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman Ramday, include Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice M Javed Buttar, Justice Tassadduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Syed Jamshed Ali, Justice Hamid Ali Mirza and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.

In his constitutional petition, the chief justice has challenged the presidential reference filed against him, the restraint order against him and the composition and competence of the SJC as well as his suspension and replacement with an acting chief justice and his forced leave. Besides seeking a stay order against the SJC proceedings, the chief justice has sought a declaration that no reference can be filed by the referring authority or examined by the SJC against the Chief Justice of Pakistan under Article 209 of the Constitution and an acting CJP cannot head the SJC.

On Tuesday, the counsel for the federation, Malik Muhammad Qayyum, in continuation of his arguments that the constitutional petition filed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was not maintainable referred to cases of the Supreme Court. He observed that the CJ case was the most important after the Maulvi Tamizuddin case. Qayyum has been on the rostrum for the last three days.

A counsel from the CJP team, Ali Ahmed Kurd, raised the objection that the government lawyers had been unnecessarily prolonging arguments as a delaying tactic on part of the government. He said the country was passing through a critical phase and the eyes of the entire nation were focused at the Supreme Court. However, the bench overruled his objection.

Qayyum once again argued that under Article 211 of the Constitution, the SJC proceedings, its report and removal of a judge on the report of the SJC cannot be challenged in any court, and the SJC enjoys blanket protection to all actions under Article 209. The actions under Article 209 include the president’s power of directing the SJC to initiate proceedings against a judge and form its opinion for the removal of the judge by the president. Qayyum was on the rostrum when the court time was over. He was asked to conclude his arguments today (Wednesday) when the bench will resume hearing of the case.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=8027

2

Justice Khaleel blasted the Government…

**Title: **The decisive case of the history of Pakistan

**Place: **Honurable Supreme Court of Pakistan

**Judges: **13 full court bench headed by Honorable Jusice Khaleel ur Rahman Ramdai

**Abdul Qayyum: **Lawyer from Federation representing Government (General Musharraf ) and is from Watan Party…

The case is clearly going in the favour of Justice Ifthikhar…13 honurable justices cleary showing the red signal to the Executive for what the General dictatorship act of removing the **most prestigious and power pillar’s representative Judiacary of Pakistan…**13 honurable judges…backing up from whole nation…now willing to bury the “Law of Necessity” once for all in the grave of dictatorship…

lets see the proceedings in the SC of Pakistan…

http://209.41.165.180/important_events/cj_reference/pages/urdu_news.asp

3

Re: Justice Khaleel blasted the Government …

On Monday…21 May hearing…Justice Khaleel in a beautiful and logical way…smashed the legality of Supreme Judicial Coucil superiority over the SC of Pakistan…

and All honurable judges are with Justice Khaleel..as per from thier remarks…Sc is not willing to take the superiority of SJC over SC of Pakistan…and this is right…SJC represents only half federation…2 HC judges from only 2 provinces…and junior judges while SC represents all federation of the Pakistan…and definitely the supreme authority in Pakistan over judicial issues…

Just see the wonderful remarks of Justice Khaleel and other honurable judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan…

http://209.41.165.180/important_events/cj_reference/archive/u_22-05-2007.asp

4

SC Justice Khalilur mocks ‘CJ’ request to remove “biased” judges

It’s ok now - anyone can have lunch with a SC justice without being accused of being biased by the non-functional CJ iftikhar. :slight_smile:

Chuckles as SC debate veers round lunches

Some light remarks about offers of lunch to judges were made in the midst of serious arguments in the Supreme Court on Thursday on the powers of the Supreme Judicial Council to proceed against Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. A 13-member larger bench, hearing a set of 23 identical petitions challenging the filing of the reference against the chief justice, composition of the SJC and its competence to try the chief justice, decided to sit from Monday to Thursday each week to decide the petitions. The luncheon issue cropped up when Malik Qayyum, defending the government in the petition of the Watan Party, cited the case “Federation versus Akram Sheikh” in which it had been observed that a judge should not even hear a party with whom he had friendly relations and said that some judges having a lunch had hit the headlines in some newspapers. “Had I taken a lunch with some judge, I also would have been mentioned in the newspapers,” he said. The reference was obviously to a news item abut two senior judges on the larger bench having lunch with government’s top aides directly involved in the judicial battle relating to the removal of the chief justice.

Later, in a code of conduct issued for the media, the Supreme Court described the controversy as unfounded and an insinuation by the media, explaining the lunch by two judges in the Islamabad Club with Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada and Attorney- General Makhdoom Ali Khan was a mere coincidence. On Thursday, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, heading the bench, said in a lighter vein that nobody had ever taken him to lunch and expressed the wish that the counsel should take him to lunch after the day’s hearing. :rotfl:“I and Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan will take all the judges to lunch to end the controversy once and for all,” Mr Qayyum suggested. :hehe: The idea was, however, rejected by Mr Ahsan, representing the chief justice, saying he was not in the habit of having lunches with judges when his cases were pending with them. “All during this period, I kept this secret fully to my chest and never mentioned the controversy despite a lot of persuasion,” he said, adding that he had received 200 text messages per hour in a day, urging him to raise the issue during the hearing in the court. “Parties and lunches never influence a judge if he is a judge,” Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi observed. “I was wondering whether we judges would stand disqualified as we are close friends of the chief justice,” Justice Faqir Mohammad Khokhar observed. However, Justice Ramday explained that the judges were not close friends of the chief justice, but his colleagues working closely with him. He also observed that the real stakeholders to institutions like the superior judiciary were the people of the country and not the judges or court officers performing the duty of dispensing justice. Mr Qayyum argued that the chief justice could be proceeded against in the SJC because he was similar to other judges of the Supreme Court. “If we accept the position taken by the chief justice that he is different from other judges, then all the protection enjoyed by other judges will not be available to him and he can be removed even by a simple notification by the federal government.” “Even this is not necessary, a letter is enough,” Justice Ramday observed in a lighter vein. On the maintainability of the petitions, Mr Qayyum argued that the SJC was not a court of law but a constitutional body comprising highest judicial officers.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/18/top14.htm

5

Re: SC Justice Khalilur mocks 'CJ' request to remove "biased" judges

Whats so much amusing about that.....its the matter of fact that Justice Falek Sher has himself refused to listen the case as his matter in the past was due to seniority bases...Justice Dogar also signed 9 march reference...he also sorry for hearing this petition.....

While the 2 judges accidently meet Pirzada on lunch ...so thats the only case.....
its the right of 13 honurable judges to listen the comments of petitioner...and act according to what the rule and justice says....

6

Re: Presidential Reference

http://news.aaj.tv/news.php?pg=3&show=detail&nid=67116

**President bound to act on Prime Minister’s advice: Qayyum **
M RAFIQ GORAYA
ISLAMABAD ( 2007-05-23 05:23:44 ) : The counsel for the Federation, Malik Mohammad Qayyum, submitted before the full Supreme Court on Tuesday that under the Constitution, in the exercise of his powers, the President is bound to act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or the prime minister.

He said when the prime minister sends a reference against a judge of the superior court, it is a constitutional obligation of the President to forward it to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) to inquire into it and give its report.

Malik Mohammad Qayyum was making his submission before the 13-member full Supreme Court for the fourth consecutive day to oppose admissibility of a petition of the Watan Party, which claims that a Reference cannot be filed against the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the reference of March 9 against the CJP was illegal, motivated and based on caprice, and malice.

He said there are 30 clauses in the Constitution which oust jurisdiction of courts and Article 211 specifically says “the proceedings before the Supreme Judicial Council, its report to the President and the removal of a judge shall not be called in question in any court.”

However, there was much discussion in the court whether preparation of the reference, prime minister’s advice to the President to send it to the SJC and ‘direction’ of the President to the Council to inquire into it form a part of the SJC proceedings or not.

Qayyum argued that as the judicial process starts with the registration of the FIR in the police station, therefore, these three processes are also the part of the proceedings of the SJC and cannot be questioned. The court observed that a reference is an order of the Executive Authority, therefore, it could not be a part of the proceedings of the SJC.

The court also observed that the President should reconsider the reference whether, prima facie, there was sufficient material against a judge that it should be sent to the SJC. At one stage, the head of the full court Justice Khalilur Rehman observed that 13 judges of the Supreme Court will not give their verdict in haste.

He said the court will examine and post-mortem all the issues threadbare and pass a judgement which is minimum controversial and does not become another Tameezuddin case. Qayyum informed the court that he would finish his argument against the admission of this petition on Wednesday at 10.30 after which leading counsel for the CJP, Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, will take the floor.

The 13-member full court headed by Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, includes Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Faqir Mohammad Khokhar, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice M. Javed Buttar, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Sayed Saeed Asshad, Justice Nasirul Malik, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, Justice Chaudhry Ejaz Ahmad, Justice Sayed Jamshed Ali, and two ad hoc judges, Justice Hamid Ali Mirza and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.

7

Re: SC Justice Khalilur mocks 'CJ' request to remove "biased" judges

Why don't you ask the presiding SC judge **Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday** as he was the one mocking the non-functional CJ's pathetic and childish request to have 2 judges removed because they happened to have lunch with the govt's counsel. :)

8

Re: SC Justice Khalilur mocks ‘CJ’ request to remove “biased” judges

:rotfl:

9

Re: SC Justice Khalilur mocks 'CJ' request to remove "biased" judges

Sir..jee..its the right of petitioner he can claim the legality of a bench and can pass his objections...is this someting unusual....Is this not the same SC who 5 judges bench stopped Supreme Judicial Council from listening the reference..so its means the Sc mocked the General and whole Government...!!!!

10

Re: Presidential Reference

It was not a Reference at all...it was just ridiculous thing...and now the Sc honurable judges have done "Suthri Safai" of the Government and General....

11

Re: SC Justice Khalilur mocks ‘CJ’ request to remove “biased” judges

Sir jee, the SC justices actually laughed in court at the non-functional CJ’s counsel original request. Pretty embarassing for Ch.Aitzaz. To borrow a phrase they ‘laughed out of court’ this request. :hehe:

**Aitzaz for more exclusions

**Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s counsel on Monday sought the exclusion of a few more controversial judges from the Full Court, expecting that any judge who will benefit from the CJP’s removal will himself withdraw from the hearing of his case. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan said, “We reserve the right to oppose the inclusion of two senior judges who had lunch with the attorney general and Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada at a time when the case of the CJP was pending in the Supreme Court and an application for the Full Court had been filed.” Ahsan was referring to Justices Nawaz Abbasi and Faqeer Khokhar. He said there would be other judges in the formation of the Full Court who were beneficiaries in the CJP case and as such they should withdraw themselves. “Otherwise, we reserve the right to raise objection against them,” Ahsan said. He said the government’s mala fide intention had become evident. “When we sought the Full Court, the government opposed it. When a five-member bench was set to hear the case, the government expressed distrust in the bench, made a U-turn and demanded the Full Court. This is dilatory and a mala fide tactic,” Ahsan added. staff report

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default…8-5-2007_pg1_2

12

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

whatsoever...the game is ended for the General...the game of removing top most honurable judge..and the game of overlapping the Executive into Judiacary....

mia jee...haar jaga wardi wala "Taika" nahi chalta ... :D

13

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ…(merged)

Silly Billy, if u bother to stop laughing and read carefully, you’d notice that the counsel never actually objected to the presence of the two judges who had lunch with govt. lawyers. Aitezaz did mention before the hearings started that the CJ lawyers’ reserve the right to object to the presence of these judges but they never actually used that right.

See ya :wave:

Crazy weddings
14

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ…(merged)

u expect him to have sense and see beyond his Muharraf/MQM view?

That’s something to laugh about! :cb:

15

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

Two and half months later the General is still very much there.
But the non-functional CJ is still not performing his previous role, and is being tried by his own justices, and his objections are being laughed out of the court.

16

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ…(merged)

On Wednesday, during the hearing the situation got tense when after Malik Qayyum had ended his submission…two counsels from the government side got up and they asked the court to allow them to continue their deliberations for the next few days…the government’s counsels for the past seven days are debating on one point that the supreme court cannot hear a case thats pending before the Supreme Judicial Council…The 13 people bench refused to hear more from them on that point…

On one point the government counsel’s said that there is pressure on Aitzaz…Mr. Ramday on this said that it is the individual who knows how much he is under pressure…

Mr. Qayyum said that the petition has been filed before time, as the result of SJC’s proceedings havent come out as yet…on this CJ remarked thats a dangerous thing you want to say…what would be the need to Supreme Court after the verdict of SJC?

17

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

yes yes..thats why in every Jalssa ...now General is asking "Certificate" of his rule from Allah will...and "prooving" him good muslim who enetered the kaaba nd roza 6 times...my dear...why all these things General not asked the people before 2.5 months. !!!!!!

clearly shows that now he is watching that his seat will no longer with him....

18

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ…(merged)

Ch.Iftikhar’s very position as CJ has been challenged by other SC judges.

Judge opts out of bench hearing CJ’s petition](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/15/top2.htm)
http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/15/top2.htm

19

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

^^ hahaha..and this seneority was ignored by General..as he made Ifti CJ...

20

Re: SC Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday blasts the Govt, mocks the CJ...(merged)

is that a typo or would u like to enlighten us abt the other judges who have challenged the CJ's seniority?

:)