Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Contempt of Court in Media after Court Decision on Raymond Davis.

ISLAMABAD, March 26: Taking strict notice of the March 11 violence-ridden strike in Karachi and other parts of Sindh, the Supreme Court on Saturday asked two provincial leaders of the People’s Party to explain why they should not be charged with committing contempt for allegedly ridiculing a court ruling and instigating people against it. The contempt notices were issued against former senator and general secretary of the PPP’s Sindh chapter, Taj Haider, and the party’s provincial media coordinator, Sharjeel Inam Memon, under Article 204 of the Constitution relating to contempt of court and Section 3 of the Contempt of the Court Ordinance, 2003. They were asked to appear before the Supreme Court on Friday. Composition of the bench will be announced later. The notice asked Mr Memon also to explain to the court why he should not be disqualified as member of the provincial assembly for alleged utterances against the judiciary under the Constitution’s Article 63(1g) relating to disqualification for being convicted by a court or defaming or ridiculing the judiciary, and Article 113 relating to qualification or disqualification for assembly membership. Notices have also been issued to Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq, who under rules acts as a prosecutor in contempt matters, as well as to the advocate general of Sindh, Supreme Court Bar Association President Asma Jehangir and vice-chairman of the Sindh Bar Council. REFERENCE: Two PPP leaders issued contempt notices by SC By Nasir Iqbal | From the Newspaper March 27, 2011 (2 days ago) http://www.dawn.com/2011/03/27/two-ppp-leaders-issued-contempt-notices-by-sc.html

1973 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan


184. Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court.

(3) Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, the Supreme Court shall, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II is involved have the power to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article. REFERENCE: PART VII The Judicature Chapter 2. THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part7.ch2.html The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/

[204 Contempt of Court.

(1) In this Article, "Court" means the Supreme Court or a High Court.

(2) A Court shall have power to punish any person who,

(a) abuses, interferes with or obstructs the process of the Court in any way or disobeys any order of the Court;

(b) scandalizes the Court or otherwise does anything which tends to bring the Court or a Judge of the Court into hatred, ridicule or contempt;

(c) does anything which tends to prejudice the determination of a matter pending before the Court; or

(d) does any other thing which, by law, constitutes contempt of the Court.

(3) The exercise of the power conferred on a Court by this Article may be regulated by law and, subject to law, by rules made by the Court.]. REFERENCE: PART VII (contd) The Judicature Chapter 4: General Provisions Relating to The Judicature http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part7.ch4.html The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/


http://dabloggerz.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Lahore-High-Court-Refuses-to-Hear-Petition-against-Davis-Release.jpgLAHORE: Registrar of the Lahore High Court has said in a statement that the LHC has noted with great regret the unsubstantial and conjectural news item appearing in a section of the press on March 17th, 2011, maligning the Honourable Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, by alleging that he had knowledge of the compromise eventually effected between Raymond Allan Davis and heirs of the deceased. The Registrar LHC categorically denied that any information in this behalf was made available to the Chief Justice or he had acted on the advice of chief minister Punjab or any other government functionary while exercising his judicial function. It is expected that the media shall act with responsibility and refrain from publishing incorrect and unverified matter, particularly with reference to the judiciary, he added. REFERENCE: LHC says CJ had no knowledge of Davis deal News Desk Friday, March 18, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=4704&Cat=13&dt=3/18/2011

Senator Syed Faisal Raza Abidi - Part 4 (Aaj Ki Khaber 17 March 2011)
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUvhhNK2sdk

Ahmad Noorani adds: With regard to the chief justice of the Lahore High Court, the report in The News only mentioned that comments had been made on the media and ìsome leadersî had ìclaimedî that he was also on board and acted on ‘suggestion’ of Shahbaz Sharif but The News had also in the same sentence clarified that these claims could not be verified from independent sources. The News actually negated the propaganda against the court by pointing out that what was being telecast and discussed on different news channels had not been confirmed by independent sources. The News story clearly stated that Pakistan Army, ISI and Punjab chief minister were the major players to get Raymond free. We maintain that The News has always respected and will continue to respect the independent judiciary of the country. REFERENCE: LHC says CJ had no knowledge of Davis deal News Desk Friday, March 18, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=4704&Cat=13&dt=3/18/2011
Siasat Pk Capital Talk 17th March 2011 P 1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TooPMNWyt6g

ISLAMABAD: Keeping aside the role played by the state institutions and respective governments in freeing American killer Raymond Davis, top jurists and lawyers say the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry should take suo motu notice of the whole Raymond Davis case declaring that the judge who ordered his release showed gross negligence while penning down his decision. Former Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Saeed-ul-Zaman Siddiqui told The News that the killing of the two Pakistanis, investigated by police was an act of terrorism and amounted to ‘Fasad’ so Raymond could not be freed by acceptance of Diyat. He said that by ordering the release of Raymond the concerned judge has abused his powers. He said that there were charges of spying against the man and he couldn’t be freed in such indecent haste.

Siasat Pk Capital Talk 17th March 2011 P 2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiZx6L3xLYQ&feature=related

Siddiqui said that the judge was supposed to examine the nature of the murder and as this is a clear case of terrorism and Fasad so it should have been decided accordingly. He said that only the state could have forgiven Davis. Former judge of the Supreme Court Justice Wajihuddin Ahmad told The News that Diyat couldn’t be accepted in such a case in which acts against the state are committed, as Davis was alleged to have committed spying by not less than the provincial law minister of Punjab and was accused of terrorizing people. Wajih, also a former chief justice of the Sindh High Court said, secondly, without the consent of the heirs of Shumaila, the wife of Faheem, the Diyat could not be allowed. He said as Shumaila was alive at the time of assassination of Faheem so without the consent of heirs of Shumaila, Diyat couldn’t be accepted in any case. As the Diyat of Shumaila is also deposited in the court, this very fact is proof that malafide was committed as Diyat is only given after consent of the parties and no consent of Shumaila’s heirs was taken.

Siasat Pk Capital Talk 17th March 2011 P 3

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9YtHj4YHNM&feature=related

Justice Wajih said that the haste in which two petitions were dismissed by the Lahore High Court shows there were certain problems and issues. He said that according to his thinking the day of March 16 was chosen deliberately to give a message to the masses that the judiciary is still not fully independent. Wajih said that as there are great irregularities in the case committed by the Punjab government and other stakeholders so Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry should take immediate suo motu notice of the situation. Other senior lawyers and top legal minds appeared on TV programmes and appealed to the Chief Justice to take suo motu notice regarding the role of the Punjab government and other institutions in freeing Raymond Davis. Senior lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar told The News that there is no doubt that Davis was involved in acts against the state and spying and could not be freed merely by accepting Diyat. He said that beside the courts, the Punjab government is primarily responsible for letting Davis free. REFERENCE: Jurists urge CJ to take suo motu against judge Ahmad Noorani Friday, March 18, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=4698&Cat=13&dt=3/18/2011

Siasat Pk Capital Talk 17th March 2011 P 4

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUHKwkPMNsc&feature=related

ISLAMABAD: Over a decade back an American official had stated: “Pakis can sell their mother for ten dollars.” Our past rulers have been proving it time and again and Musharraf broke all past records of his loyalty to Washington throughout his nine-year dictatorship and today we have demonstrated it yet again under the so-called democratic rulers. We have sold ourselves once again. Our real masters — the Americans — must be very pleased with the work of their puppets in Islamabad and Lahore. However, there are serious apprehensions that this latest shame earned for Pakistan would unleash a new wave of terrorism and fuel extremism in the country. Only time will tell as to who in the establishment and amongst the civilian rulers of Lahore and Islamabad sold their souls, dignity and honour of the nation to facilitate the smooth release and return of the American double murderer Raymond Davis. However, in view of an earlier court judgment Islamic law of Diyat is not applicable in the offences that fall under the expression of “Fasad-fil-Arz”. Additionally, Davis involvement in spying business was a crime against state, this point was altogether ignored by the federal and provincial governments.

Will Shahbaz Sharif Resign as per Promise??? (28 March 2011)

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4NTWlAjUn8&feature=channel_video_title

Although, it is for the religious scholars and jurists to ponder if Raymond’s case falls in the category of “Fasad-fil-Arz” or it was a routine “murder” invoking the provision of Diyat, this very aspect was not discussed by the Lahore sessions court. The Punjab prosecution also did not raise this aspect of this strange outcome of the Raymond case. Raymond was on ECL but he was allowed to fly abroad without any problem. The news was broken to the media only after Raymond had left the soil of Pakistan. We never thought that we would be sold in this manner and so cheaply. We knew well that Nawaz Sharif had once sold Aimal Kansi to the Americans, Benazir Bhutto handed over Yousaf Ramzi to US and the ISI and Pakistan Army under Musharraf presented hundreds of Pakistanis and other nationals including the daughter of Pakistan Dr Aafia Siddiqui to US but we mistakenly thought that it might not be possible for all of them now because of the independent media and the judiciary. But they did it again to Pakistan and did it so shamelessly.

Jang Group/GEO TV is playing Double Agent on Raymond Davis.

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEyfC4s9N1Y&feature=channel_video_title

Raja Arshad Ahmed, former attorney general and counsel representing heirs of one of the deceased, told this correspondent that the Punjab government’s prosecution did not raise the issue that this case falls in the category of “Fasad-fil-Arz”. Raymond Davis was a CIA agent. He has been involved in spying and according to the investigations of Punjab police he was involved in a cold blooded murder. Davis was an enemy of the state and there are many other Davis like American agents in Pakistan allegedly involved in creating chaos in Pakistan. None of these facts were placed before the court neither did the judge apply his mind from this very aspect and ended up settling the issue as a routine murder case under Qisas and Diyat law of Islamic jurisprudence. It was reported by The News on February 20 that a Peshawar High Court decision might spoil Washington’s option to get waived the right of Qisas and Diyat of the heirs of those killed by Raymond Davis by paying blood money. The court order was also briefly reproduced in the story but the Punjab government found it convenient to ignore this important aspect to ensure the smooth release of Raymond Davis.

Jang Group & GEO TV misguide & malign JUDICIARY (Column Kaar 16 October 2010)

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFKing5PMSY&feature=channel_video_title

In a recent decision — PLD 2006 Peshawar 82 — the PHC had denied benefits to a murderer of four persons despite the fact that the heirs of the deceased had compromised with the accused ruling, “Where case of an offender falls under the expression ‘Fasad-fil-Arz’ he shall not be entitled to any grace and leniency...” After the matter was taken up by the Lahore High Court and the possibility of immunity became impossible, according to media reports, these were the rulers of Islamabad and Punjab who had suggested to the Americans that they should pay the blood money under Islamic laws to the heirs and get their murderer released. A legal expert and ex-judge of the Lahore High Court recently told this correspondent that in his view and as per the Peshawar High Court decision the case of Raymond Davis did not fall in the category where it could be settled under Qisas and Diyat law.

Jang Group & GEO TV Murdered Salman Taseer & Shahbaz Bhatti (Abbas Athar BBC URDU)

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oezMKgwsG0&feature=relmfu

Referring to the case, heard by the then CJ PHC Justice Tariq Parvez Khan and Justice Muhammad Qaim Jan Khan, the expert on condition of not being named said that in the said case all the legal heirs of four deceased had waived their right of Qisas and Diyat but still the murderer was not freed. According to the judgment, authored by the then CJ PHC Justice Tariq: “Although all the surviving legal heirs of the four deceased have waived their right of Qisas and Diyat and their compromise appears to be genuine because of inter se close relationship but we are not inclined to give full effect to the compromise because under section 338-E, PPC notwithstanding waiver or compounding of the offence, the court may in its discretion having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, can award Ta’zir to the offender according to the nature of the offence.”

The judgment said that a wali (heir) is entitled to waive or compound the right of Qisas but still the court may in its discretion punish an offender against whom right of Qisas has been waived or compounded with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years as Ta’zir. “Keeping in view the principle of Fasad-fil-Arz, the court may in its discretion having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case punish an offender against whom the right of Qisas has been waived or compounded with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to fourteen years as Ta’zir,” says the judgment.

The judgment added that the insertion of expression “Fasad-fil-Arz” is the requirement of socio-cultural setup and to maintain law and order and to save the civic society from deterioration. In the context of Punjab police investigation proving Davis to have killed two young men in a cold blooded manner, it is interesting to read this part of the PHC judgment, “Where a person for no sufficient reason resorted to indiscriminate firing, taking lives of four innocent ladies which include his wife and three young daughters, should not go scot-free just because the legal heirs of the four deceased have waived and compounded the offence against the offender.” The judgment said, “It is a case in which the expression ‘Fasad-fil-Arz’ is fully applicable because killing of innocent persons which include a man or woman but for no reason and that too in brutal manner has not only ruined the family but has very insecure impact on the public at large.......” REFERENCE: ‘We have sold ourselves, once again’ Ansar Abbasi Thursday, March 17, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=4669&Cat=13&dt=3/17/2011

Glaring Example of Judicial Misconduct
Source: Daily Express http://express.com.pk/images/NP_LHE/20100630/Sub_Images/1100984046-2.gif

Of Plots Judges Journalists Across the Board Justice Part 1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTvG86WHIsY&feature=channel_video_title

ISLAMABAD: The issue of land allotments to the higher judiciary took a new turn after it was disclosed before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that residential plots worth millions of rupees were allotted to three top judges apparently without completing mandatory legal formalities. As the official files of the Federal Government Employees’ Housing Foundation (FGEHF) do not contain the dates of birth of the judges, the question of allotments on verbal orders, as opposed to proper procedure, comes to the fore.

Of Plots Judges Journalists Across the Board Justice Part 2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfMUTUiZNDs&feature=related

The set criteria requires an applicant to fill out an official form and give an affidavit that he or she does not own other plots or houses in the city. According to the official documents placed before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), copies of which are available with The Express Tribune, the three judges are former chief justice of Pakistan Sheikh Riaz Ahmed and Lahore High Court (LHC) judges Faqeer Mohammad Khokar and Justice Mumtaz Ali Mirza. Ahmed was allotted a one-kanal (approximately 600 square yards) plot on November 17, 2002, in G-14/4, while Khokar and Mirza got plots in G -14. This flouting of rules raises several questions over the allotment process and its transparency. One hundred judges, including the current Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, have been allotted plots in Islamabad since 1996, but these three judges were allotted plots without fulfilling legalities.

Of Plots Judges Journalists Across the Board Justice Part 3

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxXtHTgahXE&feature=related

An official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that missing records meant that these judges had not filled out the proper official forms. “It seems that orders were verbally issued and immediately obeyed by the [allotment] authorities,” the source said. “The top guns of the FGEHF clearly failed to follow the rules and simply obliged the sitting judges of the Supreme Court (SC) and the LHC.” The missing record, the source said, showed that the housing ministry was unaware of when these judges were born and joined the judiciary, and whether they were retired or were still serving. The documents reveal that the FGEHF allotted plots in the same manner to some civilian officials, whose dates of birth were also missing from the records.

One of these officials is Nadeem Shah Malik who was working as a financial adviser to the ministry of housing and works. He was allotted a plot in Sector G-13/2 on December 22, 2009. Nine other civilian employees were also allotted plots in Sector G-14 despite incomplete records. These officials are Khalida Begum (Intelligence Bureau), Rashida Begum (Pakistan Post), Aziza Begum (finance ministry), Resham Jaan (Survey of Pakistan), Shamim Akhtar (finance division), Fehmida Begum (Pakistan Post), Ziat Maman (customs department), Sardari Begum (Pakistan Post), Maryam (agriculture department). Earlier, media reports said that some well-connected SC judges tampered with the FGEHF’s official records and received a second plot each. The reports claimed that several critical files, which contained official records of expensive government plots allotted to bigwigs of Islamabad such as [now retired] Justice Sardar Raza Khan, were missing. Evidence surfaced that in Justice Raza’s case, the process of balloting was scrapped and he was given a multimillion-rupee corner plot of his choice. The then FGEHF director-general Arshad Mirza, a District Management Group officer and a relative of Justice Raza, was accused of tampering with Justice Raza’s records to enable him to acquire a second plot. These reports were never challenged. After reading these media reports, PAC chairperson Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan had ordered an inquiry against Mirza, a report of which is also pending before the PAC. Amid this scam, Mirza was also removed from office. REFERENCE: Land allotments: Verbal orders trump proper procedure Rauf Klasra Published in The Express Tribune, November 27th, 2010.

Saturday, November 27, 2010, Zilhajj 20, 1431 A.H

Of Plots, Judges, Journalists & Across the Board Justice Part 5

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmWOyNUV42o&feature=related

A quick look at the list reveals that majority of the judges got residential plots in Islamabad when they were serving in the high courts. JUDGES: Following are Supreme Court judges who got plots: Justice (retd) Mir Hazar Khan Khoso, Justice (retd) Manzoor Hussain Sial, Justice Saad Saud Jan, Justice Fazal Elahi Khan, Justice Abdul Hafeez Memon, Justice Mukhtar Ahmed Junejo, Justice Raja Afrasiab Khan, Justice Moahmmad Bashir Jahangiri, Justice Saeeduzzam Siddiqi. Besides, the following judges of the four provincial high courts also got plots.

Justice Dilawar Mahmood (Ministry of Labour), Justice Abdul Karim Khan Kundi (PHC), Justice Mian Ghulam Ahmed (LHC), Justice Agha Saifuddin Khan (SHC), Justice Kazi Hameeduin (PHC), Justice Arif Iqbal Bhatti (LHC), Justice Syed Ibne Ali (PHC), Justice Mohammad Aqil Mirza (LHC), Justice Sheikh Mohammad Zuabir (LHC), Justice Abdul Hafeez Cheema (LHC), Justice Sharif Hussain Bokhari (LHC), Justice Abdul Rehman Khan (LHC), Justice Mohammad Islam Bhatti (LHC), Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam (SHC), Justice Sajjad Ahmed Sipra (LHC), Justice Mahboob Ali Khan (PHC), Justice Ali Mohammad Baloch (SHC), Justice Qazi Mohammad Farooq (PHC), Justice (R) Mohamamd Nasim (LHC), Justice Munir A Sheikh (LHC), Justice Fida Mohammad Khan (Federal Sharaiat Court), Justice Tanveer Ahmed Khan (LHC), Justice Amir Alim Khan (LHC), Justice Ehsanul Haq Ch (LHC), Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqi (LHC), Justice Mian Nazir Akthar (LHC), Justice Ahmed Ali Mirza (SHC), Justice Raja Mohammad Sabir (LHC), Justice Karamat Nazir Bhandari (LHC), Justice Rashid Aziz Khan (LHC), Justice Munwar Ahmed Mirza (BHC), Justice Bhagwandas (SHC), Justice Mohammad Nawaz Marri (BHC), Justice Nawaz Khan Gandapur (PHC), Justice Nawaz Abbasi (LHC), Justice Falaksher (LHC), Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar (SHC), Justice Khailur Rehman Ramday, Justice Malik Qayyum (LHC), Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza (PHC), Justice Amir Mulk Mengal (BHC), Justice Chaudhry Iftikhar Hussain (LHC), Justice Mohammad Khursheed Khan (Chief Court Northern Areas) and Justice Mohammad Khial (Ombudsman office) also got plots in the federal capital.

JOURNALISTS: Sohail Ilyas, Mujeebur Rehman Shami, Abdul Ghani Ch, Zia Shahid, Rukhsana Saulat Saleem, Mohammad Anwar Khalil, Abdul Wadood Qureshi, Mian Ghaffar Ahmed, Rana Tahir Mahmood, Malik Abdul Rehman Hur, Nadeem Fazil Khan, Hamad Raza Shami, Farooq Ahmed, Rana Assar Ali Chohan, Azeem Chaudhry, Aslam Khan, Mohammad Naeem Chaudhry, Mohammad Aniq Zafar, Abdul Saeed Khan Qamar, Mohammad Dilshaad Khan, Naveed Miraj, Tahir Masood Ikram, Sultan Mohammad Sabir, Saghir Khalid, Mazhar Barlas, Maqbool Elahi Malik, Mohammad Arshad Yousuf, Javed Iqbal Qureshi, Haroon Rashid, Malik Shakeelur Rehman Hur, Wajid Rasool, Ashfaq Ahmed, Mohammad Zahid Jhangvi, Tahir Khalil, Khalid Azeem Ch, Mian Khursheeduzaman, Abdul Mohi Shah, Hilal Ahmed, Khalid Sial, Amir Iyas Rana, Zamir Hussain Shah, Aziz Ahmed Alvi, Ahmed Hussain, Rafaqat Ali, Syed Najamul Islam Rizvi, Mohsin Raza Khan, Irfan Ahmed Qureshi, Syed Ibrar Hussain Shah Kunwal, Nasir Aslam Raja, Mohammad Arshad, Ch Iylas Mohammad, Ghazanfar Ali Zaidi, Fazeela Gul, Iftikar Shakeel, Syed Ejaz Shah, Mohammad Ayub Nasir, Mohammad Saleem and Tariq Aziz. REFERENCES: New list of plot beneficiaries presented in Senate Saturday, January 16, 2010 By our correspondent http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=219055 Journalist and Plots, read page 4 of Daily Jang Friday, January 15, 2010, Muharram 28, 1431 A.H http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/jan2010-daily/15-01-2010/main4.htm The News Senate gets list of judges, bureaucrats who got two plots each Friday, January 15, 2010 By Rauf Klasra http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=218849 Myth busted: Chief justice also got a plot Rauf Klasra Published in The Express Tribune, November 25th, 2010. http://tribune.com.pk/story/81570/myth-busted-chief-justice-also-got-a-plot/

ISLAMABAD: Some elected representatives can only be seen at meetings of the parliamentary committee on reforms or television shows: the National Assembly remains the last place for such bigwigs to show up at. Renaming parliament as ‘Hyde Park’ might not be a bad idea considering that hardly 25 percent lawmakers attend the session, and if we go by the attendance of a 100-strong cabinet, the percentage of their attendance might not cross the figure of 10, according to an appropriate comment by a member of a parliamentary watchdog organisation. Nevertheless, the prime minister’s 100 percent attendance record need not be ignored, especially because he is the one who is trying his level best to keep the system from falling apart. Leaving the buttering aside, we saw a little brouhaha in the House right from the outset: a minority representative from PPP benches and others objected to a political comment by Lahore High Court’s ‘My Lord’. Chief Justice Khawaja Sharif was reportedly commenting on the involvement of minorities in bombings across the country. Minority members from the ANP, PPP and the PML-N staged a token walkout to register their protest, and asked My Lord to clarify or apologise to patriotic minorities of the country.

The demand for an apology was soon backed by another identical demand for Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif.

An inside story of yesterday’s ‘call-on’ was making rounds in the cafeteria about the infamous last-minute call from the Rawalpindi Garrisons to Shahbaz Sharif and his 15-minute stay with ‘the man in uniform’. The meeting was crispy, to the point and ended with a ‘you may leave’ note, said the moles. A party insider disclosed that there is nothing wrong with the ADC calling SS to see the chief. He said both Sharifs have been so used to landing at the GHQ since the Ziaul Haq days that they often forget democracy has returned to the country. He said SS, in particular, loved to have tea in the lush green lawns of the army houses, and whenever he left Model town, in the old days, or Jati Umra, now, he would call the ADC to enjoy habitual tea with the chief. Whether he justified yesterday’s quick-fix or revealed more kept every one of us amused. What remained an issue bugging parliamentarians and journalists alike afterwards was that at least there was someone who could get things fixed, be it the lawyers’ led long march of March 16, 2009, or divergence from tracks, when it comes to politicians, but will someone be able to curtail the political statements of My Lords? A former black-coat-turned senator said in a philosophical tone, “The nation is being collectively punished for the policies of khakis and politicians through suicide bombings, and now the judiciary has thought that it too should pay back the nation for the mistakes of the same actors who elevated their political favourites, some even contested as local bodies councillors on party tickets, to judicial pedestals.” Keeping his pitch, he questioned who would now take suo motu notice of the politicisation of our judiciary, the current CJP or those who helped him regain the post? Who helped him was a question in chorus and realizing that his tongue should not slip like Khawaja Sharif or his Kashmiri brother Shahbaz Sharif, he said “of course, the masses.”

Realising that the senator had gone into cautious mode, one of his fellow senators from a leftist party said that activisms didn’t have a long shelf life in this country. We have seen left parties, then the military, then the political parties and now the judiciary, and without any hassle, one can conclude that ultimately, with the exception of the military, none other has survived the hijacking by vested interests, he said in an attempt to add a twist to the debate. By that time the first senator regrouped his thoughts to announce that another goody-goody atmosphere is emerging, as the PML-N members would start listening to Gilani in addition to sharing the subsidy-marred coffers of Punjab with the PPP ministers. He said that following the ‘call on’, Chaudhry Nisar had been immediately asked to re-connect the lost connections with Gilani, and he did so at last night’s dinner hosted by Ghulam Bilour. Now, Ishaq Dar, Chaudhry Nisar and SS would have a meeting with the premier and in the coming days, Nawaz Sharif, would resurface as another father of the reconciliation agenda. While the answer to if there will be any memorandum of understanding (MoU) for My Lords remains elusive, it is not impossible and “just before taking a commercial break, let me tell you someone out there is keeping a log book on all of them.” REFERENCE: Is there any MoU for My Lords? By Saeed Minhas Wednesday, March 17, 2010 http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C03%5C17%5Cstory_17-3-2010_pg7_1

ISLAMABAD: A reported statement by Lahore High Court Chief Justice (CJ) Khawaja Muhammad Sharif that the Hindu community was funding terrorism in Pakistan, irked members of the National Assembly, as many of whom joined minority members and walked out in protest. The lawmakers also demanded Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry take suo motu notice of the CJ’s remarks. Ramesh Lal, a minority lawmaker from the Pakistan People’s Party, raised the issue on a point of order and censured the CJ’s remarks, saying the Hindu community in Pakistan was as patriotic as the rest of the country and the remarks were highly uncalled for. Lal announced a token walkout and was joined by a few other members belonging to different parties, including the Awami National Party. He said the remarks hurt the over three million Hindus in Pakistan, adding the statement was against national unity. Labour and Manpower Minister Khursheed Shah tried to defend the CJ, saying he could not have made such a statement and might have referred to India and not the Hindu community. REFERENCE: LHC CJ’s remarks irk NA members Wednesday, March 17, 2010 http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C03%5C17%5Cstory_17-3-2010_pg7_6

ISLAMABAD: On Monday, Shahbaz Sharif’s arguably controversial remarks pertaining to the Taliban sparing Punjab provided fodder for animated discussion in the House. On Tuesday, the parliamentary anger mills were fed by another Sharif. This time, no less than the honourable Chief Justice of Lahore High Court, Khwaja Mohammad Sharif. His remark about “Hindus” giving money and the Muslim militants using it to carry out terrorist activities while hearing a case made the Hindu and other minority parliamentarians cry out an anguished Hi Bhagwan and led to what must be the first ever parliamentary boycott of a sitting chief justice of a high court. We have seen a lot of strange things happen in our exceptionally colourful chequered political history but never before a walkout of such a nature. In a desperate bid to do some instant damage control, a rather unconvincing Syed Khurshid Shah wanted the House to believe that the honourable CJ must have meant to say “Hindustan and not just Hindu”, adding: “It was apparently a slip of tongue.” But Ramesh Laal wasn’t buying and making a speech before his protest walkout said that the honourable chief justice should have talked about a country but not about a religion. On hearing this one of the chaps sitting in the press gallery quipped: “If nothing else, a judge must be able to judge his own words.” A tad harsh assessment but not altogether without merit. It wasn’t as if Muslim MNAs weren’t in a supporting mood for their minority colleagues. Rasheed Akbar Niwani of the PML-N wanted the judges to “speak through judgements and not otherwise”, while Munawar Talpur apologised to the Hindu MNAs whom he described as “as good a Pakistani as anyone else”. It is inconceivable that the honourable chief justice would deliberately want to hurt the feelings of the hundreds of thousands of Hindu Pakistanis but still, exceptional care must be exhibited by men of stature, particularly those whose word is literally the law, to avoid strengthening any negative stereotyping of religious and ethnic minority groups in particular. REFERENCE: Of moneyed Hindus, Nawab sahib’s deadly post master & next finance minister Wednesday, March 17, 2010 By Mohammad Malick [The News International] [LINK IS DEAD]

ISLAMABAD, March 16: It was a rare, judge’s turn to be judged in the National Assembly on Tuesday as Hindu members staged a walkout to protest at reported remarks by the Lahore High Court (LHC) chief justice alleging Hindu financing of terror attacks in the country. Some members of the Awami National Party too joined the first walkout against the judiciary in Pakistan’s parliament before the protesters were brought back to hear words of sympathy for the injured sentiments and some advice for judges to focus on delivering justice rather than publicity despite a government minister’s statement that the remark by Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif while hearing a case in Lahore on Thursday seemed to be “a slip of the tongue”. The protest was the second raised in the house over press reports in as many days after sharp criticism of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif over his appeal to Taliban in a speech to a seminar in Lahore on Sunday to spare his province terror attacks because of some shared views with his PML-N party. PPP’s Hindu member Romesh Lal, who raised the issue, said sentiments of an estimated four million Pakistani Hindus had been injured by the LHC chief justice’s remarks, as reported in a section of the press, that while terrorist bomb blasts were being carried out by Muslims, “money used for this came from Hindus”. The member said if a country was suspected of sponsoring such attacks it should be named, but blame should not be put on just Hindus who, he said, were as good patriots as other Pakistanis.

While drawing attention of President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to what he called worry caused to Hindus, he appealed to Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to take suo motu notice of Justice Sharif’s remarks. As Inter-Provincial Coordination Minister Pir Aftab Shah Jilani and some other members of the ruling PPP went out of the chamber to persuade the protesters to return, party chief whip and Labour and Manpower Minister Khurshid Ahmed Shah told the house the judge seemed to be blaming India for financing the Taliban rather Hindus, adding he was sure a clarification would come “by tomorrow”. PML-N’s Rashid Akbar Niwani said judges should devote to dispensation of justice instead of seeking publicity as he also advised the media to exercise “restraint”, particularly blasting unspecified television anchorpersons who, he said, should also be held accountable for their earnings together with “heads of (government) institutions” as often-maligned elected politicians. REFERENCE: A judge is judged in NA, with walkout By Raja Asghar Wednesday, 17 Mar, 2010 http://news.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/19-a-judge-is-judged-in-na,-with-walkout-730-hh-07

BARELY days after the Punjab chief minister was caught playing to the Taliban gallery, another high official from the province is in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. This time, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif has sparked outrage for reportedly saying that Hindus were responsible for financing acts of terrorism in Pakistan. The remarks came while the judge was hearing two identical petitions against the possible extradition of Afghan Taliban suspects. It may well have been a slip of the tongue by Mr Sharif, who might have mistakenly said ‘Hindu’ instead of ‘India’ — nevertheless it was a tasteless remark to say the least. Although such remarks warrant criticism what makes them worse is the position of the person who makes them. These sort of comments are the last thing one expects to hear from a judge, that too the chief justice of a provincial high court. What sort of message are we sending to our minorities, as well as to the world, when the holder of such a respected public office makes comments that come across as thoughtless? The Hindu members of the National Assembly walked out of the house on Tuesday to protest the remarks. The members said the comments had hurt the feelings of Pakistani Hindus — and there is no doubt that they had. REFERENCE: Tactless remarks Dawn Editorial Thursday, 18 Mar, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/14-tactless-remarks-830-zj-10

LAHORE, June 30: The Pakistan People’s Party and some prominent lawyers have taken exception to the statement of the Lahore High Court chief justice and the party has announced that it will move the Supreme Judicial Council against him. Addressing the Hafizabad Bar Association on Tuesday, LHC CJ Khwaja Muhammad Sharif had reportedly asked the PPP to quit the Punjab coalition if it had objections to provincial prosecution secretary Rana Maqbool. Mr Maqbool has been accused of physically torturing President Asif Ali Zardari when he was in police custody after ouster of the then prime minister Benazir Bhutto on Nov 5, 1996. Punjab Senior Minister Raja Riaz has even called the LHC CJ a “PML-N spokesman” and asked him to resign from his office to contest election on the PML-N ticket if he was interested in politics. “We will foil designs of ‘Sharif courts’ against democracy,” said Raja Riaz who is also the parliamentary head of his party in the province.

He was speaking at a press conference at the Lahore Press Club on Wednesday a day after he had announced observing a black day on the day Hakim Ali Zardari, father of President Asif Zardari, would be summoned by the court in a NAB reference. “We are going to file a reference in the Supreme Judicial Council against Khwaja Sharif for acting as a PML-N spokesman,” Riaz said. “Is a chief justice authorised to represent a proclaimed offender and can he advise a major political party to quit the government,” he asked and further inquired whether the statement of Khwaja Sharif was worthy of a high court chief justice. “This is a conspiracy against the PPP government. The Sharif courts are trying to corner the largest political party of the federation but we will not allow them to succeed,” Riaz said and added that the PPP had defeated military dictatorships in the past and now it was capable of fighting against “judicial dictatorship”. “I, on behalf of 108 PPP Punjab legislators, urge Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry to take note of the statement of Khwaja Sharif,” Riaz added.

PPP central information secretary MNA Fauzia Wahab told Dawn that Khwaja Sharif’s statement had “unveiled the mystery” as to why there had been a “furore” over his elevation to the Supreme Court. “He (Khwaja Sharif) is Sharif’s trusted fellow and even he has admitted this in his last speech,” she said and added that now every one knew why the Sharifs wanted to retain him in Lahore. Former Supreme Court Bar Association president Aitzaz Ahsan has also criticised Khwaja Sharif for ‘giving a political statement’. “A judge should resign from his\her office if he or she wants to do politics,” Mr Ahsan said. Ahsan, who was on forefront in ‘free judiciary movement’, said the judges should not make such statements. “Such statements bring a bad name to the judiciary and judges should refrain from doing so as they are supposed to speak only through their judgments,” he said, adding such statements invited criticism from political parties and other quarters. He admitted that the government and the judiciary were heading towards confrontation. “The people are raising fingers at the Supreme Court for laying so much emphasis on NRO cases as they think it was only because President Zardari was one of the beneficiaries,” he said and hastened to add the courts were dispensing justice on merit. Human rights activist advocate Hina Jilani described the CJ’s statement as “most inappropriate”. “Such a comment must not come from any member of the independent judiciary. These kinds of statements are bringing a bad name to the judiciary,” she added. REFERENCE: Hafizabad bar speech: PPP to move SJC against LHC chief justice By Zulqernain Tahir Thursday, 01 Jul, 2010 http://news.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/local/lahore/hafizabad-bar-speech-ppp-to-move-sjc-against-lhc-chief-justice-170

No comments: