During the course of the proceedings, the acting AG informed the SC that despite the court’s orders, some TV channels were still conducting talk shows on the NRO. The chief justice again directed TV channels not to conduct talk shows on the NRO which is sub judice. “TV channels should not debate the matter which is sub judice: otherwise, we would issue an order in black and white in this regard,” the CJ remarked. REFERENCE: Court unhappy with NAB By Sohail Khan Thursday, December 10, 2009 SC concerned over Swiss case record’s safety Enquires about Zardari’s $47m http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=25997&Cat=13&dt=12/10/2009 According to a news report in The Nation on 8 December 2009: The Chief Justice advised the media not to discuss the matter with regard to NRO in television programmes until the case was disposed off. However, he said media could report the proceedings openly. By: Zahid Gishkori | Published: December 08, 2009 http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/08-Dec-2009/NRO-a-law-paving-way-for-reconciliation-with-corruption-CJ ٹی وی مباحثوں میں این آراوکیس پربات نہ کی جائے،چیف جسٹساسلام آباد (جنگ نیوز) عدالت عظمیٰ کے چیف جسٹس افتخار محمد چوہدری نے ذرائع ابلاغ سے کہا ہے کہ وہ قومی مفاہمتی آرڈیننس (این آر او) کے بارے میں درخواستوں کی سماعت کے دوران ٹی وی مذاکروں اور مباحثوں میں این آر او پر بات نہ کریں تاکہ تعصب کا تاثر پیدا نہ ہوتاہم ٹی وی چینلزاوراخبارات کو یہ اجازت ہوگی کہ وہ اس کیس کے حوالے سے رپورٹنگ کریں۔ پیر کو 17 رکنی بینچ کی سربراہی کرتے ہوئے چیف جسٹس نے کمرہ عدالت میں موجود ذرائع ابلاغ کے نمائندوں کو مخاطب کرکے کہا کہ ہم کوئی حکم جاری نہیں کر رہے۔ ذرائع ابلاغ این آر او بارے درخواستوں کی سماعت کی رپورٹنگ کرے لیکن جب تک مقدمہ زیر سماعت ہے اس وقت تک ٹی وی مذاکروں اور مباحثوں میں اس پر بات کرنے سے احتراز برتا جائے۔ (Jang)
NOW READ AS TO HOW JANG GROUP VIOLATES THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS BY COMMENTING ON MATTERS WHICH ARE SUB JUDICE!
Thursday, December 10, 2009, Zil'Hajj 22, 1430 A.Hhttp://www.jang.com.pk/jang/dec2009-daily/10-12-2009/main3.htm
Thursday, December 10, 2009, Zil'Hajj 22, 1430 A.Hhttp://www.jang.com.pk/jang/dec2009-daily/10-12-2009/main2.htm
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"QUOTE"
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/
"UNQUOTE"
SUKKUR, Jan 5: The president of Supreme Court Bar Association, Abdul Haleem Pirzada, has said that the exile of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif had staked the credibility of the judiciary, and time would come when this case would be reopened. Speaking at a press conference here on Friday, he said that the President had no legal power under Article 45 of the Constitution to send Nawaz Sharif into exile. This even amounted to jailbreak by the present government, he remarked. He said that Nawaz Sharif had been a convict in the plane hijacking case, moreover so many cases were pending in the courts. He questioned the validity of this action as in what capacity the government would answer the courts when these cases are heard? He said with this act the judicial system had lost its credibility, and once the people loose their faith in the system no one can stop them from resorting to unconstitutional and unlawful methods to achieve their rights. He said there was no clause in the Constitution, which coulde mpower the government or the President to exile anybody to a foreign country, nor there was any precedence in Islamic Shariat. He termed the Provisional Constitutional Order an unlawful act of the government, and said that the decisions under the PCO was challengable. He said the judicial system had been under jeopardy, because the judges took a wrong turn by taking oath under the PCO. REFERENCE: Exile put judiciary's credibility at stake: SCBA president Correspondent DAWN WIRE SERVICE Week Ending: 06 January 2001 Issue:07/01 http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2001/jan0601.html#exil 
QUETTA, July 26: Lawyers at a convention here on Saturday stressed upon the opposition leadership that any compromise on the Legal Framework Order or the president’s military post in the meeting with the government on Sunday would divide the forces opposing the LFO and benefit the military dictator. Representatives of the bar associations and councils of the Supreme Court and high courts from Islamabad, Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP and the members of local lawyers’ organizations spoke about the LFO and provincial autonomy. Pakistan Bar Council Vice-Chairman Mian Abbass presided over the fifth all Pakistan lawyers convention and Supreme Court Bar Association President Abdul Hamid Khan was the chief guest. The convention, through a resolution passed unanimously, called for a boycott of the courts on July 30 to protest against the killing of three judges in the Sialkot jail and condemned the authorities’ failure to stop the supply of firearms into the prison. It opposed the dispatch of Pakistani troops to Iraq and said the occupation forces should face the crisis instead of using Pakistani troops as their mercenary division. It demanded that the provinces should be given autonomy as prescribed in the Constitution. It deplored the promulgation of the Contempt of Courts Ordinance and considered it an attempt to muzzle the campaign of the legal fraternity to expose the misdeeds of the superior judiciary and its collusion with the military establishment.
In session - 11th march 2011 - p1
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhR8pJ360RQ&feature=player_embedded
ISLAMABAD, Nov 3: The Supreme Court has decided to strip the president of Supreme Court Bar Association of the honour of being a “senior advocate” which was bestowed upon him by the former Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan. Sources in the SC have confirmed that the decision to withdraw the status of senior advocate has been taken at the highest level after SCBA’s recent statement in which it said the judiciary had ceased to be independent after taking oath under the PCO. Hamid Khan, president of Supreme Court Bar Association, antagonised the judiciary by making a written statement before the five-judge bench, headed by the chief justice, that his association had no faith in the judiciary and arguing any matter before it, involving constitutional matters, in its present composition, would be an exercise in futility. “Those who can bestow the honour, can also withdraw the same,” an official of the Supreme Court said. The SC bench, in its order passed on the application of SCBA, mentioned Hamid Khan, as “Hamid Khan, ASC”, or only Hamid Khan, and not as “Hamid Khan, Sr ASC”, as is the practice with the senior lawyers. Under the SC rules, the status of a senior advocate can be awarded “on application or otherwise” to those who have ten years of SC practice, and “were judged by the knowledge, ability and experience to be worthy of the status of Senior Advocate.” REFERENCE: SCBA chief faces action By Rafaqat Ali November 4, 2002 Monday Sha’aban 28,1423 http://archives.dawn.com/2002/11/04/nat15.htm
Civil Review Petition No.103 of 2002 in Constitution Petition No.1 of 2002
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/JR_Civil_Review_Petition_No_103_of_2002.pdf
Mian Abbass said the lawyers’ joint action committee had decided to hold a long march to accelerate the movement against the LFO and the military dictatorship. He said the date and route of the march would be finalized in a meeting in Islamabad on Aug 8. He said the next convention would be held in Lahore on Sept 5 to show that the lawyers would not make any deal on principles about the LFO, the president’s discretionary powers under Article 58(2-b) of the Constitution and his military post. He alleged that the “nexus of generals and judges to undermine the sovereignty of parliament and suppress the independence of judiciary” was aimed at undermining the fundamental rights of the citizens and imposing an unconstitutional rule in the country. The SCBA president alleged that the understanding between the “khaki uniform and the black gown” was an attempt to safeguard each other’s interests and sideline the elected representatives. He said the judges had legalized President Gen Pervez Musharraf’s rule for three years and the army ruler had given an extension in the retirement age of the judges of the same period.
In session - 11th march 2011 - p2
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxjlaLyONZA&feature=player_embedded
Civil Review Petition No.103 of 2002 in Constitution Petition No.1 of 2002
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/JR_Civil_Review_Petition_No_103_of_2002.pdf
He criticized the role of some judges who had legitimized the illegal steps of the military dictator. Hamid Khan said the implementation of Article 6 of the Constitution was necessary. He said the Pakistan Bar Council had published a white paper and another such document might be prepared. He said he had conveyed the message to the politicians invited by the prime minister for dialogue that a compromise on the LFO, the National Security Council, extension in the judges’ service, the president’s uniform and the contempt of court ordinance would divide the lawyers and political leaders. Amanullah Kanrani, Mohsin Javed, Ali Ahmed Kurd and Malik Zahoor Shahwani said the lawyers of Balochistan would continue their role for constitutional rule, democracy and provincial autonomy.
Bar Council Azad Kashmir Vice-Chairman Raja Sajid Ahmed assured the participants of cooperation in the struggle for the restoration of the Constitution. Lahore High Court Bar Association President Hafiz Abdur Rehman Ansari said the suppression of constitutional procedures could lead to disunity and damage the integrity of the country. Qazi Anwar and Sardar Sanaullah Gandapur from the NWFP said the denial of the provinces’ right over their resources would undermine the federal parliamentary system and lead the country to crisis. Munir Ahmed, Yasin Azad, Aqil Lakani, Nahid Afzal and Mohammad Ali Abbasi from Sindh and Kazim Khan, Sheikh Jamshed and Malik Saleem from Punjab also spoke. REFERENCE: Compromise with govt to divide opposition’ By Our Correspondent July 27, 2003 Sunday Jumadi-ul-Awwal 26, 1424 http://archives.dawn.com/2003/07/27/nat4.htm
In session - 11th march 2011 - p3
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=26pyXufsy-0
Civil Review Petition No.103 of 2002 in Constitution Petition No.1 of 2002
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/JR_Civil_Review_Petition_No_103_of_2002.pdf
ISLAMABAD, Nov 7: The Supreme Court Bar Association will soon convene a meeting to consider the issue of withdrawal of the status of senior advocate from the SCBA president, Hamid Khan, after his statement that the bar has no faith in the judiciary after it took oath under the PCO. Sadaqat Ali Mirza, an office bearer of the SCBA, speaking to reporters at a press conference on Thursday, said that the SCBA had highest respect for the members of the judiciary but it was inappropriate for the judiciary to attribute political motives to the bar for its principle stance with regard to the taking up of the matters of constitutional importance before the courts. He said the bar had only asked the apex court to return its review petition and such request could not be termed as contempt of court. It was a routine with the lawyers to ask the courts not to hear the case if they had any suspicion about getting justice from the bench would not be possible, he added.
The SCBA office bearer said that the Supreme Court’s saying that the bar was criticizing its role for political and other extraneous motives, was wrong and it would not help the cause of any party. He argued that the statement of the SCBA which was placed before the Supreme Court bench by its president was the voice of the whole lawyers community and not the whim of any individual. He said that the whole legal fraternity was dismayed at the treatment being meted out by the apex court to its leader Mr Khan and asked the court to consider the whole matter with patience. Mr Mirza requested the court to try to ascertain why the whole legal fraternity was against it and regretted that the honour which was bestowed upon the SCBA president had been withdrawn without citing any reason through a suo motu action. He said the bar was opposed to such unilateral acts. REFERENCE: Lawyers flay Supreme Court decision By Our Staff Reporter November 8, 2002 Friday Ramazan 2,1423 http://archives.dawn.com/2002/11/08/nat2.htm
ISLAMABAD, Oct 4: A 10-member bench of the Supreme Court hearing petitions challenging the eligibility of Gen Pervez Musharraf for the presidential election will on Friday give its verdict on a plea for staying the polls after completion of arguments by the two sides. Justice Javed Iqbal, who is heading the bench, said on Thursday that the court would not take into consideration the repercussions if it found that staying the poll process was a legal and constitutional requirement. The bench includes Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Faqir Mohammad Khokhar, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Syed Jamshed Ali and Justice Ghulam Rabbani. The bench asked the two sides to confine their arguments to the grant of interim stay. Justice Iqbal maintained that five judges of the court had dismissed petitions of Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan against Gen Musharraf’s candidature only on the question of maintainability, and not on the merit of the case. Hamid Khan, the counsel for Justice (retd) Wajihuddin Ahmed, requested the court to stay the election, saying once completed the process could not be challenged. In case Gen Musharraf won the polls, he would argue that he had been elected and the election could not be challenged, he said. He said the electoral college would have sufficient time to elect a president if the election was put off till the disposal of the petitions challenging Gen Musharraf’s candidature. He said staying the polls would not be disadvantageous for anybody, but would help ensure justice. On the other hand, he said, if an ineligible person was allowed to contest the election, it would cause irreparable loss to other candidates.In session - 11th march 2011 - p4
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=921LgDRXegE&feature=player_embedded
Civil Review Petition No.103 of 2002 in Constitution Petition No.1 of 2002
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/JR_Civil_Review_Petition_No_103_of_2002.pdf
Civil Review Petition No.103 of 2002 in Constitution Petition No.1 of 2002
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/JR_Civil_Review_Petition_No_103_of_2002.pdf
The counsel said the matter should be decided in accordance with the Constitution, irrespective of implications. He said interpretation of articles of the Constitution relevant with the presidential election was required.He contended that Gen Musharraf suffered from inherent disqualification to be a candidate for the office of president and the amendment made to Rule 5 of the Presidential Election Rules, 1988, was contrary to the Constitution. He said the outgoing assemblies could not elect a president for another term and the election could not take place before Nov 15 when the president’s present term would expire. Justice Iqbal asked Hamid Khan to state reasons for staying the election because it could be done only under extraordinary circumstances. The counsel said halting the election was in the national interest and it would prevent a ‘chaotic situation’.Views On News 15 Oct 2010 with Dr. Shahid Masood.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu-OoGeK_Mo
The Jang Group has become so obsessed with quickly seeing the back of the government and is probably salivating so much over the prospects of threatened long marches that sometimes it gets muddled up in its excitement... This is the heading from yesterday's daily Jang about Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani trying to reassure people - dreading a government-Supreme Court showdown in court today (October 13) - that nothing bad would happen. The headline reads: "13 March Ko Kuchh Nahin Hoga..." [Nothing will happen on March 13...]. REFERENCE: Crap All Round WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 http://cafepyala.blogspot.com/2010/10/crap-all-round.html
(Courtesy: Mr. Maaz Abdullah)
One question that should be asked and is being ignored “who aired the news” and CJ “orders” government to find out about the news According to a notification released by the SC, directors of three local TV channels and Chairman Pemra, Mushtaq Ahmed, were informed by a notice to be present at the hearing. The full court will only do the hearings of judges’ restoration notification on 18th October. While other benches will proceed with their normal hearings. -DawnNews SC hearing for restoration notification on 18 Oct Saturday, 16 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-sc-hearing-for-restoration-notification-on-18-oct-rs-01
Justice Mulk asked if there would be a remedy available after completion of the electoral process. Justice Khokar said if the election was postponed what was the guarantee that the polls would be held on time and it would not create more chaos. Hamid Khan argued that there would be no chaos because the assemblies with fresh mandate would elect a new president. It would also regularise the presidential election process for future, he said. Attorney-General Malik Mohammad Qayyum said the presidential election was being held in accordance with provisions of the Constitution and there was no reason to postpone it. He said the petitioners had vested interests and wanted to destabilise the system. He said the president had submitted a statement in the court that he would doff his military uniform after his re-election and before taking fresh oath. But if the election was postponed, he said, the president would remain in uniform till March.
The Jang Group has become so obsessed with quickly seeing the back of the government and is probably salivating so much over the prospects of threatened long marches that sometimes it gets muddled up in its excitement... This is the heading from yesterday's daily Jang about Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani trying to reassure people - dreading a government-Supreme Court showdown in court today (October 13) - that nothing bad would happen. The headline reads: "13 March Ko Kuchh Nahin Hoga..." [Nothing will happen on March 13...]. REFERENCE: Crap All Round WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 http://cafepyala.blogspot.com/2010/10/crap-all-round.html
(Courtesy: Mr. Maaz Abdullah)
One question that should be asked and is being ignored “who aired the news” and CJ “orders” government to find out about the news According to a notification released by the SC, directors of three local TV channels and Chairman Pemra, Mushtaq Ahmed, were informed by a notice to be present at the hearing. The full court will only do the hearings of judges’ restoration notification on 18th October. While other benches will proceed with their normal hearings. -DawnNews SC hearing for restoration notification on 18 Oct Saturday, 16 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-sc-hearing-for-restoration-notification-on-18-oct-rs-01
Justice Ramday said it was not a question of postponing the election for a month and asked if it would make a difference if the vote was postponed for a few days. “The whole world will laugh on us if the election is postponed. By staying the polls, we will stop a constitutional process which should not be done,” said Mr Qayyum. Staying the election would be interference in the electoral process.He said the court should hear the case on merit and decide it before the poll. He said six judges of the Supreme Court had already held that such petitions were not maintainable and, therefore, there was no reason to stay the election. Sardar Abdul Latif Khosa, the counsel for PPP’s Makhdoom Amin Fahim, said the court had to decide the fate of the nation by deciding once and for all if a man in uniform could contest the election. He said the polls should be stayed till this question was decided. Many complications would arise if the election was not stayed, he said. Dr Farooq Hassan, the counsel for petitioner Wasim Rehan, said the entire process of nominations for the presidential election was invalid. He said the Chief Election Commissioner had amended the poll rules to benefit one person, therefore it was a case of legitimacy and if the election was not stayed, the status would continue.Capital Talk 15th october 2010 part 1
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MPPARWrzQo
Capital Talk 15th october 2010 part 2
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPD-PTCKqbA&feature=related
The Jang Group has become so obsessed with quickly seeing the back of the government and is probably salivating so much over the prospects of threatened long marches that sometimes it gets muddled up in its excitement... This is the heading from yesterday's daily Jang about Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani trying to reassure people - dreading a government-Supreme Court showdown in court today (October 13) - that nothing bad would happen. The headline reads: "13 March Ko Kuchh Nahin Hoga..." [Nothing will happen on March 13...]. REFERENCE: Crap All Round WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 http://cafepyala.blogspot.com/2010/10/crap-all-round.html
(Courtesy: Mr. Maaz Abdullah)
One question that should be asked and is being ignored “who aired the news” and CJ “orders” government to find out about the news According to a notification released by the SC, directors of three local TV channels and Chairman Pemra, Mushtaq Ahmed, were informed by a notice to be present at the hearing. The full court will only do the hearings of judges’ restoration notification on 18th October. While other benches will proceed with their normal hearings. -DawnNews SC hearing for restoration notification on 18 Oct Saturday, 16 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-sc-hearing-for-restoration-notification-on-18-oct-rs-01
Justice Iqbal said the plea for staying the election would be decided on Friday after completion of arguments by both sides. Sharifuddin Pirzada and Wasim Sajjad will argue against staying the polls. During the course of hearing, Justice Iqbal took strong notice of remarks of Justice Wajihuddin about the bench and said he had “crossed the limits”. He asked Justice Wajihuddin’s counsel why should contempt of court proceedings be not initiated against him for his objection over the composition of the bench. “Why should a contempt of court notice not be issued to him?” The judge asked if the court should stand hostage to one of the groups. The court, he said, could not reconcile the situation where a candidate was raising objections against the bench and his counsel was reposing faith in it. Hamid Khan said he did not know what his client had said but he apologised if the statement was contemptuous. Justice Ramday said what had been happening in the country after March 9 was exceptional. He said everybody, including the media, had the right to comment or debate but they should do it in a responsible way. REFERENCE: Verdict today on petition to stay presidential poll By Iftikhar A. Khan October 05, 2007 Friday Ramazan 22, 1428 http://archives.dawn.com/2007/10/05/top4.htmCapital Talk 15th october 2010 part 3
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpORRK8mgf4&feature=related
Capital Talk 15th october 2010 part 4
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUmnUOcBntA&feature=related
The Jang Group has become so obsessed with quickly seeing the back of the government and is probably salivating so much over the prospects of threatened long marches that sometimes it gets muddled up in its excitement... This is the heading from yesterday's daily Jang about Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani trying to reassure people - dreading a government-Supreme Court showdown in court today (October 13) - that nothing bad would happen. The headline reads: "13 March Ko Kuchh Nahin Hoga..." [Nothing will happen on March 13...]. REFERENCE: Crap All Round WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 http://cafepyala.blogspot.com/2010/10/crap-all-round.html
(Courtesy: Mr. Maaz Abdullah)
One question that should be asked and is being ignored “who aired the news” and CJ “orders” government to find out about the news According to a notification released by the SC, directors of three local TV channels and Chairman Pemra, Mushtaq Ahmed, were informed by a notice to be present at the hearing. The full court will only do the hearings of judges’ restoration notification on 18th October. While other benches will proceed with their normal hearings. -DawnNews SC hearing for restoration notification on 18 Oct Saturday, 16 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-sc-hearing-for-restoration-notification-on-18-oct-rs-01
ISLAMABAD, Oct 30: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it took oath under the PCO to preserve the judicial system, and due to its judgment in which it validated the military takeover the army was going back to barracks by restoring democracy. The apex court, responding to the statement of the Supreme Court Bar Association that arguing a case before the present judiciary was a futile exercise “as it had ceased to be independent,” observed that it reserved its right to take action against the president of SCBA, Hamid Khan, for his “disparaging remarks” about the independence of the judiciary. The SCBA had asked the SC bench on Monday to return its review petition as the bar was of the view that the judiciary, after taking oath under the PCO and by upholding various orders and acts of the present military regime, had ceased to be independent and no substantial question of constitutional importance should be argued before this court in its present composition.” The SC bench called the president of the SCBA, “Hamid Khan, contemner,” and said the SCBA statement was “motivated by malice, extraneous considerations and for political reasons.” In its five-page order, authored by Chief Justice Riaz Ahmad, the SC held that the contents of the application constituted gross contempt of court as it used disparaging remarks about the judiciary through the language which could not have been expected from the pen of the SCBA president. The SC asserted that democracy was being revived in the country and the regime would go back to barracks because of the SC judgment in Zafar Ali Shah case and the oath taken by judges of the SC (under PCO). “It is because of the judgment in Zafar Ali Shah case and oath taken by the judges of the Supreme Court that a time schedule was given and the regime had to hold elections and to go back to barracks after restoration of democratic institutions.”Jang Group & GEO TV misguide & malign JUDICIARY (Column Kaar 16 October 2010)
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFKing5PMSY&feature=channel_video_title
The Jang Group has become so obsessed with quickly seeing the back of the government and is probably salivating so much over the prospects of threatened long marches that sometimes it gets muddled up in its excitement... This is the heading from yesterday's daily Jang about Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani trying to reassure people - dreading a government-Supreme Court showdown in court today (October 13) - that nothing bad would happen. The headline reads: "13 March Ko Kuchh Nahin Hoga..." [Nothing will happen on March 13...]. REFERENCE: Crap All Round WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 http://cafepyala.blogspot.com/2010/10/crap-all-round.html
(Courtesy: Mr. Maaz Abdullah)
One question that should be asked and is being ignored “who aired the news” and CJ “orders” government to find out about the news According to a notification released by the SC, directors of three local TV channels and Chairman Pemra, Mushtaq Ahmed, were informed by a notice to be present at the hearing. The full court will only do the hearings of judges’ restoration notification on 18th October. While other benches will proceed with their normal hearings. -DawnNews SC hearing for restoration notification on 18 Oct Saturday, 16 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/06-sc-hearing-for-restoration-notification-on-18-oct-rs-01
The court said that in compliance with its judgments, elections were held in the country on Oct 10, 2002, and the process of transfer (of power) was in progress. The SC said that taking oath under the PCO by judges of the superior judiciary was welcomed by the senior lawyers like Khalid Anwar and SM Zafar. It said that those judges who had refused to take oath under the PCO did so according to their conscience and “heavy responsibility lay upon the judges who took oath (under PCO) for dispensation of justice.” The SC stated that its judgment, validating the military takeover, was universally acclaimed and had been described as a landmark judgment.The court said it could proceed to take action against Hamid Khan, president of SCBA, but it was always appropriate to exercise restraint. “However, we reserve the right to take the proper action at an appropriate stage.” The SC said: “Unfortunately, some members of the Bar, motivated by malice, extraneous considerations and for political reasons or ill-will, make irresponsible statements to tarnish the image of the judiciary which is not at all in the supreme national interest.” The SC said it “strongly deprecate and condemn this attitude on the part of Hamid Khan and considering the contents of this application scandalous, malicious and irrelevant, we order that paragraph (I) and (II) therefore be struck off.” The SC said it had highest respect for those members of the bar, who have shown respect to the judiciary. By making such attempts the members of the bar were abusing the sacred elected office, it said. The court further observed that by taking oath under the PCO the judiciary had “saved the independence of (the) judiciary as well as the system of administration by preserving the Bar as well.” “Failing which the bar would have been replaced by all together a new system unknown to a civilised society.” It said that judges took oath under the PCO “in the highest national interest, and therefore we have deliberately not chosen to proceed against Hamid Khan in view of the interest of the institution, “but we reiterate that we reserved our right to proceed against Hamid Khan, contemner.”
The court observed that Hamid Khan knew that all the points which had been raised in the review petition had already been dealt with in the judgment, and the court would not allow re-hearing of the matter. The court said that knowing full well the consequences of the review petition, the counsel deliberately declined to argue the case “motivated by malice, ill-will and extraneous considerations.” The court said that review petition was fixed for hearing on Oct 28 when a request for adjournment was moved on behalf of Hamid Khan, expressing his inability to appear before the court on the said date due his unavoidable personal obligation and prior commitments. The bench assembled in the court to consider the aforesaid request for adjournment when, surprisingly, the court noticed the presence of Hamid Khan in the courtroom who came at the rostrum and submitted an application under the caption “Statement at the Bar”. The court said that it was high time that counsel like Hamid Khan and the members of the bar realised their responsibility towards the courts and the society. “If this state of affairs continues then God be with us and nothing more could be said about it. As a consequence of the above, this review petition has no merits and the same stands dismissed accordingly”, the court concluded. REFERENCE: Supreme Court says its verdict has helped revive democracy By Rafaqat Ali October 31, 2002 Thursday Sha’aban 24,1423 http://archives.dawn.com/2002/10/31/top9.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment