This is this SC and that was that SC

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
41

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Ever hard of urdu Mohavra "Saiyyaan Baney KOTWAAL tu dar kahey ka"

2 Likes
Aaaj
42

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

As if Mushrraf cared about the constitution or its authority. He is a dictator. Do dictators care about the constitution?

Cafe ke Baithak - MAy
43

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Pakpatriot1: When people argue for the sake of argument and have attitude that 'may na manu' than that can be done by everyone, and than whoever has the danda wins. So, forget that attitude and give some logical answer, or accept that you have no answer (and I believe that is fact too). I know that you would not give any serious answer as all supporters of Ifti know that Ifti was extremely corrupt, hence you will avoid serious answer, still I am asking.

Government believed that Ch Iftikhat was corrupt and was not suitable for the post of CJ. Government had enough proof that Iftikhar was corrupt. *.

Now, when government believed that CJ was corrupt and unsuitable for the job, they have two choices. Either hold the ear of Iftikhar, pull him off his chair, bring him to the door, give him a big kick, and throw him on road. Well, that would have been one way, the way that most dictators would have done.

Another way is constitutional and decent way, and that is to send reference to Supreme Judicial Council and get the requirement of investigation done on Iftikhar before taking step to let him work or sack him. Government chose the second method of sending reference to Supreme Judicial Council for investigation.

Now, why you think that sending reference to SJC was not right and was illegal? If to you it was illegal, than what government should do with corrupt CJ (CJ that they consider corrupt)?

If sending reference to SJC was right than ... how come judges stopped the investigation by SJC and thus gave verdict that Ifti and they are above law, whatever corruption they do.

To me, once they stopped SJC to work, they left no option other than second method, and that was for government to hold ear of Ifti (along with all his goons), pull him off his chair, bring him to the door, give him a big kick and throw him on road, and that is what government did. What is wrong there?

To me, Ifti and his goon judges asked for it and that is what they got. If they were decent people, they would have let SJC to do its job and would not have created a dead end situation.*

44

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Time for revolution and get rid of this dictator. How about getting a few people together for a long march from Islamabad to Karachi. How many will turn up? :)

45

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Ayesee batayain tum kewn poochtay hou
Jo batanay ka qabil nahie hay ... :)

Arabic song :) ... Fi Hagat Tet'hass *Me singing*
46

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Nice to see that your views are changing. :D Are you planning to lead for revolution in the country...err I forgot you're from India. Why are you so much in love with Pakistani dictator?

Cafe ke Baithak - MAy
47

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Because he is a man of peace, and the greatest Pakistani leader since Quaid-e-Azam. Pakistanis are so lucky to have him as their leader. :jhanda:

48

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Do you mean Pakistanis, who sponsor state terrorism?

~*~ Tagged - simii ~*~
49

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Pakistan and its state sponsored terrorism is legendry. It can be discussed in another thread.

Aaj Kiss Baat Par Gussa Aaya ??????
50

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Really? Did you forget the operation Kargil liberation? BTw, its amazing how much interested you have in Pakistan and Pakistani leadership. Chalo as long as you're a well wisher its all good.

51

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

No. It was the biggest mistake made by Nawaz Sharif. He should never have sent Pakistani Jawans on war like that. Just imagine if Nawaz Sharif was still in power, he would have used Nuclear weapons by now. Just aswell Great President Musharaf got rid of him and saved Pakistan. :jhanda:

52

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

If "suo motu" is so much despised, why not make laws to curb that power from judiciary? Isn't it that simple? Or do we have to kick out judiciary every time we see a suo motu action going against us?

53

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

NO sir! I'm talking about those, who blind folded supported terrorists by words and deeds. The country Itself is innocent. Like some do It these days with full support for Mush and his terror camp.

54

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

Yep. The blind support for terrorists is legendry. We can discuss in another thread. Don't forget USA almost put Pakistan on the list of states that sonsored terrorism.

55

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

  1. The Chief Justice is only a symbol... Dont repect the CJ, thats fine... But respect the institution that he has come to respect.. And whether you like it or not, MANY people have been inspired by the man. So atleast respect those who stand up for him...

If our intention is to have an independant judiciary, a counter to the overwhelming force of the Army, then we need people like CJ to stand up to dictators. I still consider him heroic, you dont have to, but atleast respect the fact that for many, he has become a symbol against the rule of dictators.
So the Judiciary is corrupt.. Big deal.. Point is to have a democratic instituion that functional and powerful... Dealing with a corrupt judiciary can be a long term goal that is achieved through democratic means, not some ill planned emergency by someone who really hasnt the authority to be giving one.
Besides, if we can put up with a rampant corruption of the Mush govt, then im sure we can put up with the corruption of the Supreme Court... Atleast the Supreme Court is a democratic institution...

  1. Its not my logic that undermines the dictator, its his own actions.. The very nature of dictatorship is such that it breed discontent. For all the so called good he has done, he has washed it all away with his own actions. And what difference does the good he has done make if in another few years, more discontent develops? You cant crush the aspirations of people forever without them lashing back... How many lawyers can he arrest and how long can he confine them?

    Why do you think there is so much division in Pakistan? Because a dictator does things by decree, not by consensus.
    So NO, dictatorship has never worked and will never work... Mushu is only a temporary fix, after him, the same problems will surface, and he wont be around to fix them, then what?
    Democracy is the long term solution to Pakistans problems... Dictatorship may work for a few years, but not for long... Democracy is vibrant, it produces new leader, it creates unity.. Dictators do the opposite. And I realize the current crop of leader are corrupt, but they wont live forever.. But Democracy as an institution will long out live these corrupt politicans.
    Jut the fact that we should agree but dont speaks volumes.

  2. You yourself said that this is a dictator... And a dictator is by definition a bad thing.
    Now the issue is that your willing to settle for this dictator... Dont expect other people to follow in line.
    Dictators arent moved by speeches... Dictators dont care for the oppinion of the people...
    But wasnt this country created based on the belief that the People of Pakistan would be free to choose their govt? In your heart of hearts do you honestly believe that Jinnah meant to have Musharaf in power?!?!
    Its the right of the people, when faced with dictatorship to struggle to take back their country.. Pakistanan belings to her people, and the police have no right to stand in their way nor does this unelected dictator...
    And lets not forget that no revolution has ever succeded by following the rules.. Particulalry those rules created by an uneclected dictator...
    The students were beaten up, no surprise there, far more imprtant and influnential leaders have taken beatings to get their point across.. But lets support their effort thats all.. Because its their country, not Musharaf the dictators. Maybe if they hadnt tried to conferge at the CJ's home this wouldnt have happened... But then, he again, is the symbol against this dictatorship, so who is Musharaf to try and prevent these students and activists.

56

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

As per the Corruption of Judiciary, I havet seen any convincing evidence of it...
What I have seen is that the CJ yanked the ears of some very corrupt individuals (and lets not fool ourselves, Mush govt is FULL of corrupt individuals). This was enough to convince many people that this CJ wouldnt stand idly by while corrupt officials went along their merry way.
This was another reason for why the CJ was deposed. But logicaly, the CJ has every right to call the people out... Obviously Mush isnt concerned with their wrong doing.
And as far as letting terrorists go... I dont buy Musharafs line here. Who were hese so called terrorists? Who gave Mush the authority to kidnapp people by night and not give a word to anyone of their location? Who gave Mush the right to be above the law? This my friend was not the fight between an enlightened dictator and a corrupt CJ, but a a fight between the forces of democracy against the forces of dictatorship. If the CJ is guilty of that, then thats a crime we should all commit.

What you call a govt, I dont recognize as a govt, I call it a dictatorship...
Now for the sake of argument, lets say it is a govt. Well, thats fine, the govt took the issue to the SJC and the Chief Justice was found not guilty. That ends that.
If you are willing to repose confidence in the judgement of Mushraf, a single individual, then allow us the the curtesy of reposing confidence on those who founf the CJ not guilty. I dont think it was illegal, I think Mushs rational behind it was illegal. And if you forget, Mush tried to simly order the man to step down in his office, which is when the CJ said he would not. Thats when it became a legal matter. Fine, thats in the past, Mush did it the legal way... But now, Mush used his dictatorship to get his way.. Thats the issue.
The case was thrown out because the govt had no case... They tried to use irrelevant and from what I heard, even ridiculous claims to justify their side. The case was thrown out and the judge exopnerated because there was no case against him...

Now, Democracy isnt perfect, but Mush tried it... I gave him credit for that... But Democracy is opposed to dictatorship... Going strictly by the constitution, Mush shouldnt be in power.
I dont care what the Chief Justice did in the past, point is, Mush is unconstituional... The CJ cant be guilty of holding Mush's feet over the fire of the constitution.

If you believe the govt can hold the CJ by the ears and kick him our, that where we have problem.. The CJ is not subject to the dictates of some dictator.. He wasnt even president when he called the Emergency.
Its the CJ that should have Musharaf by the ears and his goons...
The CJ and the rest of justices represent for many people, the only democratic institution that can stand up to the forces of dictatorship and Army rule. The fact that you dont see the problem with a dictator kicking out a legal a democratic figure, has more to do with your problem with Democracy, not with the CJ. But ultimately, what else is going to work for the country..

I for one would like everything to be put out in pubblic... First lets see what the Lawyers presented before the judges of SJC. Why did they throw that case out? WHY according to them, was the CJ not guilty? Is the govt willing to allow that?
And also, with people like you denouncing the Chief Justice, he has a right to stand up for himself.
If Mush isnt afraid and he thinks he has a point, let him debate the CJ. At the very least, let the CJ address the people who accuse him.
Mush has been on tv countless time and his chamchas have been praising him to no end... Isnt it about time we heard the true story from the Chief Justice himself?*

57

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

How would you see any convincing evidence when you do not find out but argue without even knowing the facts?

I Read your post very carefully. :slight_smile:

Bhai meray, I believe you are educated and educated person makes judgmental comments after knowing the facts and understanding that too. You want to have opinion on corruption of Ifti but do not know what happened in SC or anything about SC judgment, neither it seem you care, still you want to argue on your beliefs of lies (spread by media), is that not ridiculous?

Hence before making any comments and judgments, please know the facts: Let me put the facts here, but if you do not believe me, no problem, you can certainly find that out yourself, no objection. To get your facts right, instead of going on comments by some corrupt journalists, check the news and check what came out of court. My request with you is that to please answer my last post after knowing the facts, because apart of many things in your post are irrelevant, but main thing is that you tried to answer without knowing the facts, and that means answer was unsynchronized too (like, someone asks that ‘where is Islamabad’ and answer comes that ‘Islamabad is city’).

So after reading the facts give the answer:

If executive considers that a judge or CJ is corrupt, than should executives send reference to SJC and get it investigation by SJC consisting of number of Supreme Court and High Court judges to find out if particular judge or CJ is really corrupt OR Executives should give judge or CJ a hard kick on his butt and send them packing out of their post?

Facts: (if you do not agree with the fact than do your own research but please do not comment without knowing the fact or mention things that are irrelevant to what we are discussing:

SJC (Supreme Judicial Council) is different from SC (Supreme Court). SJC consists of Supreme Court and High Court judges (including Chief justices). Please do not confuse SJC with SC, as they are different.

On 9th of March President sent reference against CJ to SJC (Not SC but SJC).

Since SJC is headed by CJ of Pakistan, ex-CJ Ifti would have headed SJC and could have influenced SJC too.

One of the allegations in reference was that Ifti is corrupt and interferes in the functioning of other bodies, so for SJC to work independently against CJ reference, CJ was suspended so that he does not interferes with SJC functioning.

Ideally SJC should have done the investigations without interference from anyone, and it was duty of all judges, including judges of SC to cooperate and facilitated SJC investigations.

What happened? Ex CJ and his corrupt lawyers (including Atizaz Ahsan) started beating the bush, appealed to SC on constituent of SJC, competence of judges in SJC, mishandling of CJ, suspension of CJ, and making lot of irrelevant arguments regarding reference and intentions behind reference. Throughout their appeal, they started politicizing the reference on roads, while avoiding any argument on reference and various allegations in the reference on ex-CJ Ifti. All this held the functioning of SJC on investigation the reference.

Until mid of May, corrupt ex-CJ and his corrupt lawyers managed to keep SJC from not investigating the reference on one pretext or another. In mid May, after corrupt politicians behind ex-CJ managed to fool lot of people, divided Pakistan, created mayhem in the country (especially after 12th May), and turned issue of CJ from simple reference case into political issue, ex-CJ and his lawyers managed to get a stay on SJC investigation duty on ex-CJ reference. This is when it happened.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/16/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/16/top2.htm)

**Now instead of reference, SJC and their duty became target. Judges start arguing that if SJC has any right to investigate judges or not. **

That means to make judges above all laws, and that if they do corruption or whatever than it is fine, as there is no body that can investigate them and government cannot do anything. It means that now CJ is son-in-law (daamaad) of government and thus King of Pakistan above all Laws and morality, and Pakistan his Jagir, where his sons and daughters should do whatever they like too. Media did all to get the situation to this level.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/17/top4.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/17/top4.htm)

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/22/top1.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/22/top1.htm)

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/24/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/24/top2.htm)

http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/25/top1.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/25/top1.htm)

http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/05/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/05/top2.htm)

From all above, it is evident that judges were certain that CJ investigation would prove that he was corrupt and he would get sack, thus all effort of corrupt ex-CJ and his corrupt lawyers was to stop reference getting investigated and undermine functioning and purpose of SJC.

Thus, SC started a situation where they started pushing the government to wall, such that if government wants to do something, they have to act and take extra constitutional measures (what happened on 3rd Nov) or keep quite (like tolerating corrupt CJ).

Then by June, corrupt ex-CJ and his corrupt Lawyer Atitaz Ahsan started new argument regarding sending CJ on forced leave:

http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/22/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/22/top2.htm)

In the end, on 21st July, Supreme Court declared that Iftikhar forced leave was illegal, and stopped SJC to investigate corrupt ex-CJ Iftikhar and thus made the reference invalid.

This means that ex-CJ is not cleared of allegations but it means that all allegations were left as it is and investigation on those allegations are stopped, as desired by corrupt Iftikhar and his corrupt lawyers including Atizaz Ahsan. Result is that, corruption and pigheadedness won and honesty lost.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/21/top1.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/21/top1.htm)

Actually, Judge Ramday accepted the fact that since 1973, it was first time that executives invoked reference against judge, else in past executives used to kick judges at will unconstitutionally.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/top2.htm)

Well, that is what maybe people in Pakistan like, and that is why in the end same happened to corrupt judges on 3rd Nov. What Pakistanis showed during disgraced ex-CJ case that what Pakistanis want is that executives instead of sending reference and using constitutional means to investigate integrity and honesty of judge, executives should kick these unworthy corrupt judges or even honest judges out of office at will. In the end Musharraf realized that ‘latoo kay bhoot batoo say nahie manta’ … so he gave them a good kick

Believe me, if instead of running away from investigation this corrupt CJ had contested the allegations in SJC and would have come through, I would have given him all respect, but this disgraced corrupt CJ was what allegations says and thus need no sympathy or respect.

Ramday rigthly said:

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/top2.htm](http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/top2.htm)

‘Many judges dismissed arbitrarily’
By Nasir Iqbal

ISLAMABAD, July 3: Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday on Tuesday observed that it was for the first time since 1973 that the executive had invoked the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), instead of butchering unwanted judges arbitrarily.

“Eyebrows are raised when judges are removed by the executive not in accordance with the law,” said Justice Ramday, who is heading a 13-member larger bench hearing a petition filed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry challenging the presidential reference against him, composition of the SJC and its competence to try the CJ.

“When nobody felt using Article 209 what to talk of misusing it.”

In contrast to the Monday’s proceedings when the 13 judges were visibly disturbed after finding scandalous material against some of the judges in the presidential reference, Tuesday’s proceedings went smoothly.

Justice Ramday recalled how former chief justices Mohammad Yaqoob Ali, Anwarul Haq and Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, also mentioning the name of the incumbent CJ, had been removed unceremoniously by the executive and said that the number of superior court judges removed arbitrarily was countless.

“In a country like ours, there is no need to use Article 209,” Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi quipped.

The issue surfaced when federal government’s counsel Malik Mohammad Qayyum argued that Article 209 was as applicable to the CJ as to other judges and that this provision ensured the independence of the judiciary.

“Our history is replete with incidents of removing judges” which, he said, he was not proud of. “But we should follow the Constitution,” he said, recalling that 50 impeachments had taken place in the US, of which 10 were against judges.

Malik Qayyum said he still believed that the CJ should not be made non-functional. At this, Justice Ramday observed that the counsel was saying that he was still the CJ, but the flag had been removed from his vehicle as well as the residence while his chambers had been sealed.

Only Law Minister Wasi Zafar could offer an explanation in this regard, Malik Qayyum said. He argued that there was no separate provision for the appointment, remuneration, retirement or resignation for the CJ, and therefore, no difference could be made between other judges and the CJ.

“The SJC is competent to decide incapacity or misconduct of the CJ like other judges and there is no provision for special forum for trial of the CJ in the Constitution. All members of the SJC are replaceable and even CJ, who heads it, can be replaced by the acting chief justice,” Malik Qayyum argued.

He said if it was declared that the SJC was not a proper forum to try the CJ then it would also deny all available protection to judges under Article 209 and the CJ would be left at the mercy the executive.

On the formation of opinion, he said the president always acted on the advice of the prime minister who formed opinion to forward the reference, though the president had the power to send the advice back to the premier for reconsideration.

When Malik Qayyum referred to a chapter in the Constitution on the establishment of the Federal Sharia Court (FSC), Justice Ramday deplored that the chapter had been introduced by the martial law administrator and not by the lawmakers or the founding fathers with intent to dump unwanted judges.

“You are right but the provision was adopted by a sovereign parliament,” Malik Qayyum argued.

But this was not part of the original scheme, Justice Nasirul Mulk observed. He was supported by Justice Faqir Khokhar who said in a lighter vein that it was an ‘adopted baby’. Justice M. Javed Buttar, however, said the chapter did not show any legislative intent.

Justice Ramday referred to what had happened to judges like justice Mehbub, justice Aftab, justice Nasir Aslam Zahid and justice Khalilur Rehman and observed that the FSC was made not for the glory of religion but to be used as a dumping ground.

cafe wale
58

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

^^ wow reply. Good work buddy it will clear confusion in alot of mushi haters & ex-cj lovers.

59

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC


Are you saying there is no provision in constitution to replace a SJC member in case the SJC is inquiring one of them??? I can't believe that.

Timepass
60

Re: This is this SC and that was that SC

As an affected citizen of Pakistan on breaking of all the institutions by a mad criminal where can I take my case....where can I take my case on suspension of my basic human rights.....where can I take my case on being robbed by a tyrant ditator as a hard working tax payer>>>>

It is so pathetic to see supporters of this criminal talking about law and justice....these people have really no shame>>>>