Shame on you CJ Chaudhry
رحمتیں ہیں تیری جرنیلوں اور طالبانوں پر
برق گرتی ہے تو بے چارے سیاستدانوں پر
You sold your soul to the devil and the price was so cheap!
قوم فروختند و چہ ارزاں فروختند ؟
Comments
Latest Comments
رحمتیں ہیں تیری جرنیلوں اور طالبانوں پر
برق گرتی ہے تو بے چارے سیاستدانوں پر
You sold your soul to the devil and the price was so cheap!
قوم فروختند و چہ ارزاں فروختند ؟
CHEAP TERE JANISAR , BADBUDAAR BADBUDAAR .. SHAME ON YOU !!
Shame Shame Kana Pco Chief Justice
What about rejecting the bail to Makhdoom Javed Hashmi [MNA-PML-N]. Mr Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary didn’t say no to Mr Musharraf on Javed Hashmi Case?
SC dismisses 3 appeals of Javed Hashmi for his release on bail Tuesday October 10, 2006 (0139 PST)
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?156686
ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court has dismissed three appeals filed by PML -N president Makhdoom Javed Hashmi against his trial in jail and for his release on bail and suspension of jail term. A two members bench of apex court comprising chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi heard the case.
Chief Justice observed that judiciary is independent and the supreme can in no way be pressurized in any decision. ” We will give decision according to law of the land. We have to see the law. No one will be allowed to politicize the case. There is ambiguity in the arguments offered by Akram Sheikh, counsel of Makhdoom Javed Hashmi. It is in the knowledge of those who hold press conference that their statements would reach the military men as well.
Earlier giving arguments, Akram Sheikh said federal government had lodged no complaint. Is there any law in place in the country under which holding the press conference in cafeteria is a crime. The apex court has taken thousands of suo motu actions on social issues. Can suo motu action not be taken with reference to an individual whose fundamental rights have been breached, he contended. Chief Justice observed that the court has to see if the appeal can be declared maintainable or otherwise. The High court verdict has also been reviewed.
Akram Sheikh told Makhdoom Javed Hashmi is in jail since October, 29, 2003 who was convicted and sentenced on April, 12, 2004. Cafeteria is part of parliament and it is legally protected. Some one had talked in upper house and action was initiated against him. Chief Justice remarked speaking in the upper house and holding press conference are two different things. Does it fall under the powers of speaker that the case should have been registered on his complaint or otherwise.
Akram Sheikh submitted that national assembly had tried to explain about the constitution but no mention was made about cafeteria in the constitution. NA speaker can register case through his secretary. But he did not do so. It was a strange press conference where in no reporter was present. Defending the government, special prosecutor general Munir Ahmad argued high court had taken no wrong decision. The man who had registered FIR had entered into cafeteria with the special permission and card. 14 witnesses were presented in the trial court who proved 7 charges correct which were leveled against the accused. The trial court had awarded punishment after it. The high court had also declared the verdict of subordinate court correct . No defence witness appeared from the accused side in the court. The appeal filed by Malik Qayyum against trial in jail was also rejected.
Nawaz criticises judiciary for rejecting Hashmi’s appeal By Our Staff Reporter
October 10, 2006 Tuesday Ramazan 16, 1427
http://www.dawn.com/2006/10/10/nat2.htm
ISLAMABAD, Oct 9: Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Monday paid rich tribute to jailed party leader Makhdoom Javed Hashmi, saying that his name would become synonymous with courage and sacrifice in the country’s history. The PML-N leader’s statement was issued from London and released by the party’s secretariat here after Mr Hashmi’s bail appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court. The PML-N chief said that the entire nation saluted him for remaining steadfast on principles.
Injustices done to Mr Hashmi were evident, even to the ‘outside world’ but “unfortunately it is not obvious to our higher judiciary”, he said. “Spirits of political workers, who have dedicated their lives for the supremacy of the constitution and democracy, cannot be subdued by such decisions,” the statement quoted him as saying.
Mr Sharif said that Javed Hashmi and others, who had refused to bow before the dictatorship of Gen Musharraf, were assets for the party and society. He expressed the hope that democracy would prevail over forces of military dictatorship because of the sacrifices rendered by Mr Hashmi, adding that Pakistan would soon attain a respectable position in the comity of nations.
Javed Hashmi, PML’s acting president, is in detention for the past three years on charges of treason.
Commenting on rejection of Mr Hashmi’s appeal by the Supreme Court, PML-N information secretary Ahsan Iqbal in a separate statement said that unfortunately this had shown that the judiciary had double standards.
“We welcome the release of PPP leader Yusuf Raza Gillani by the judiciary, who was subjected to victimisation by the Musharraf regime, (but) in Mr Hashmi’s case the criteria changed,” he said.
“Mr Hashmi is a prisoner of conscience and the whole nation feels proud of him. Such decisions will not break the resolve of the PML-N but further strengthen the will of its leaders and workers to continue the struggle for victory of constitutions and democracy in the country. This has once again demonstrated that the Musharraf regime still fears the PML-N and considers it (the main threat),” he said.
Hashmi’s bail plea rejected By Nasir Iqbal
December 6, 2003 Saturday Shawwal 11, 1424
http://www.dawn.com/2003/12/06/top13.htm
ISLAMABAD, Dec 5: The District and Sessions Judge, Islamabad, Chaudhry Asad Raza, dismissed on Friday the bail application of Alliance for Restoration of Democracy President Makhdoom Javed Hashmi and fixed Monday for regular hearing of a mutiny case against him.
“By going through the record of the case, it seems the accused, prima facie has committed an offence which falls under section 124 A (Sedition) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and, therefore, cannot be granted bail,” observed the judge in his 11-page verdict.
The judge said the letter the accused read out and distributed among press reporters and others seemed to be carried by him for the first time.
“We will definitely challenge the decision before the high court and will avail all judicial avenues available to us to get a bail in favour of Javed Hashmi,” defence counsel Latif Khosa and Syed Zafar Ali Shah told Dawn.
The district and sessions judge also mentioned the statements of the witnesses which were produced by the prosecution and observed that an attempt was made to create a feeling to abet mutiny against the high command of the armed forces.
Two witnesses, Captain Jehanzeb Zahoor and Captain Nadir Saleem, in their statements before the magistrate had stated that they felt insulted while listening to the letter being read out which instigated them for mutiny against the high command of the armed forces. Two media persons, one from daily Islam and other from the government news agency APP, who had covered the press conference, had also recorded their statements.
According to the verdict, the statement of the witnesses also showed that this letter could cause treason among the army personnel and create public disturbance, hatred against the Constitution, subvert laws of the state and disturb tranquillity in society.
The issue as to from where the letter came and its veracity would also be looked into during the regular hearing of this case.
About the application of Mr Hashmi, arrested on Oct 29 on the charges of issuing statements against the army, regarding the provision of A-Class in the jail, the court directed the Adyala jail authority to submit a detailed report in this regard on Dec 8 when Mr Hashmi would be produced before the court on the expiry of his judicial remand. The court also might give its decision on his application on the same date.
Later, Mr Zafar Ali Shah, talking to reporters, said the decision was expected and accused the government of political victimization.
He recalled that special prosecutor Munir Bhatti in the challan he presented before the court had also involved other parliamentarians in the case but only Mr Hashmi was being victimised.
Late release of Javed Hashmi on the eve of his daughter`s marriage, an unwelcome gesture: Liaqat Sunday December 24, 2006 (0215 PST)
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?164043
MULTAN: MMA central leader Liaqat Baloch has said MMA does not welcome government step on late release of Makhdoom Javed Hashmi enabling him to attend marriage of his daughter and demanded case be withdrawn and PML-N acting president be set free. He said this while talking to the journalists on the eve of marriage of Makhdoom Javed Hashmi`s daughter marriage. Baloch held NA speaker is custodian of house and he should have taken timely step. He did not do so nor he issued production order. Case should be withdrawn against Makhdoom Javed Hashmi and he should be released. Hamza Shahbaz son of PML-N president Shahbaz Sharif was also present on occasion but he did not talk to the journalists.
JI leader Farid Ahmad Paracha said responsibility rests with the PPP-P to play its role for formation of grand alliance. The impression about deal between government and PPP-P should be dispelled. Opposition should jointly wage struggle against the dictatorship. Transparent elections can not take place under general Musharraf. Resignations from MMA are not hurdle on the way to formation of grand alliance. He told MMA supreme council will take final decision on resignations. Time has come collective campaign should be launched and resignations be tendered, he stressed. PPP-P leader Fakhar Imam said Benazir has to decide about attending the All Parties Conference (APC) convened by Nawaz Sharif or otherwise. Former president Rafiq Tarar said general Musharraf is playing the role of enemy of country.
End
Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Pliant/Slave Judiciary under Military Regime.
Human Rights Watch is often quoted on the Restoraion of Judiciary and Restoration of CJ Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary. Lets read what HRW has to say about Asif Ali Zardari. I wonder where was was Mr Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary [upgraded by Musharraf during Martial Law rather Musharraf administered his OATH for the Supreme Court] and his Chief Spokesman Mr Ather Minallah who had served under the very General Musharraf during his Pure and Un-edited Martial Law Government. Where were Mr Ather Minallah and CJ Mr Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary when under their very nose below mentioned Human Rights Abuses were rampantly allowed against Makhdoom Javed Hashmi and Asif Ali Zardari. Dear Moderators, please call spade a spade.
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH REPORTS ON PAKISTANI GOVERNMENT’S REPRESSSION OF POLITICAL OPPONENTS. Year wise data.
Repression of Political Opponents
http://hrw.org/englishwr2k7/docs/2007/01/11/pakist14756.htm
The government continues to use the National Accountability Bureau and a host of anti-corruption and sedition laws to keep in jail or threaten political opponents, particularly members of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party and the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz). As elections approach in 2007, such persecution is expected to increase. Makhdoom Javed Hashmi, of the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy, who received a 23-year sentence for sedition in April 2004, a charge brought against him for reading an anti-Musharraf letter to journalists, remained in jail at this writing.
Arbitrary Arrest and Detention of Political Opponents
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/12/14/pakist9852.htm
The government continued to use the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and a host of anti-corruption and sedition laws to jail political opponents or blackmail them into changing their political stance or loyalties or at the very least to cease criticizing the military authorities.
In April 2004, the president of an opposition party, Makhdoom Javed Hashmi of the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy, was sentenced to twenty-three years in prison on sedition charges for reading an anti-Musharraf letter to assembled journalists. Meanwhile, Asif Zardari, husband of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has begun his ninth consecutive year in prison. Initially the government filed twelve cases against Zardari, most based on charges of corruption and financial impropriety. Though he has been bailed in eight and acquitted in four of these, in December 2001 a thirteenth case was filed against him on charges of evading duty on the import of a second-hand car. Zardari awaits a bail hearing.
Torture and Arbitrary Arrests of Dissidents and Political Opponents
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2003/12/31/pakist7008.htm#6
Torture is used in Pakistan by military agencies primarily to “punish” politicians, political activists, and journalists who challenge the government’s actions. Torture by the military usually takes place after the victim has been abducted; the purpose is to frighten victims into changing their political stance or loyalties or at the very least to cease criticizing the military authorities. The victim is often let go on the understanding that if he fails to behave, another abduction and further mistreatment will follow. In this manner, the victim can be kept in a state of fear for several years. Rights groups have raised the case of the detention and torture of Rana Sanaullah Khan, an opposition legislator who was whipped, beaten, held incommunicado, and interrogated for a week in police custody before eventually being released in November 1999. Apparently because Sanaullah refused to be cowed by the incident, he was abducted again in March 2003 and received similar treatment before being released. Meanwhile, Javed Hashmi, acting president of the opposition Pakistan Muslim League (N), remains in custody facing charges of sedition after he criticized military authorities at a press conference.
Pakistan: End Persecution of Political Opponents
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/12/28/pakist9933.htm
Zardari had been accused of corruption during Bhutto’s term as prime minister, but his lone conviction was later reversed because of governmental interference with the judicial process. By December 2001, Zardari had been granted bail in all cases pending against him. However, in a move apparently designed to prevent his release, the Musharraf government filed a new case accusing Zardari of evading import duty on a second-hand car. On November 22, the Supreme Court granted him bail in this case and he was released. Though Zardari’s release was ordered by the Supreme Court, government functionaries publicly stated that he had been released as part of a “deal” with the PPP that would culminate in the party’s recognition of the institutionalized role of the military in Pakistani politics. This would allow General Musharraf to hold the dual roles of army chief and president in exchange for a role in government and the dropping of charges against Bhutto, Zardari, and others.
Arbitrary Arrest and Detention of Political Opponents
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/pakist12254.htm
The government continued to use the National Accountability Bureau and a host of anti-corruption and sedition laws to jail or threaten political opponents. Makhdoom Javed Hashmi, of the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy, began a twenty-three year sentence for sedition, a charge brought against him for reading an anti-Musharraf letter to journalists in April 2004. In April 2005 thousands of opposition Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) supporters, including several PPP parliamentarians, were arbitrarily arrested in a countrywide crackdown. Though many of those arrested were subsequently released without charge, cases against hundreds were filed under the Anti-Terrorism Act and under Pakistan’s criminal procedure code. Scores continue to face charges and the fear of re-arrest. On May 11 Shahbaz Sharif, president of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N), was forcibly deported to Saudi Arabia when he attempted to end three years of involuntary exile. Prior to his arrival at Lahore Airport, scores of PML-N leaders and supporters were arrested and released subsequently.
During the summer of 2005, Musharraf presided over a three-phase local government election marked by brazen intimidation, coercion, and pre-poll rigging. Some forty people died in election-related violence, making this the most violent electoral exercise in Pakistan’s recent history. During the campaign, many opposition candidates faced violence and intimidation at the hands of the police and civil administration. Independent observers reported numerous instances of kidnapping, mistreatment, and arbitrary detention of opposition supporters, as well as pre-election and election day irregularities.
Samad Khurram used to be a ardent supporter of Free Judiciary Movement, in fact he was the brain behind CJ’s visit to USA for receiving Harvard Medal, read his article on Judiciary, read him on Lal Masjid Clerics.
The Taliban are here Monday, April 20, 2009 Samad Khurram
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=173372
Back in 2002, I was returning from Friday prayers when I saw an unusual gathering of singing and quasi-dancing mullahs. Unusual because I had always assumed mullahs to be against all types of kufr (art). The amused crowd were listening to chants of “Taliban aa-gae! Taliban aa-gae!” I smirked: As if! Pakistan is a nuclear country with the seventh-largest army. We’re safe.
The mullahs’ songs have been answered – the Taliban indeed are coming. And with them the cowards are bringing a lifestyle that destroys everything Pakistan.
Oh, no! Wait! This guy is on the paycheque of those who are trying to break Pakistan. The Taliban are our heroes, it is America which is in the wrong. Yes, this is the typical self-defence mechanism coming to full force. Having nothing to lose, and having been already declared a CIA agent earlier in life, I suppose I’ll continue. Continuing with a genuine fear that these words are falling on either deaf or hostile ears, it may well be that Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s Pakistan is over in a year if all this chaos continues.
Perhaps, if Jinnah knew that the country he founded was going to become an arena for public flogging, where the laughs of sadist barbarians will mingle with the screams of women and children, he would not have decided on creating it. Had he known that there would be more suicide bombs in his country than any other place in the world, where militants and bigots would go around threatening women to “dress properly,” where schoolchildren would have to undergo security checks as if they were in a war zone, he would be extremely upset.
All our talk shows discuss the merits and demerits of the 17th Amendment, or bash America and India. Yes, American drones and Indian statements are a threat to our sovereignty. Yes, the balance of power is important, but it is the Taliban who have killed more people than India or the US drones combined, and have made us feel more unsafe than anyone else in the past thirty years. What other definition of sovereignty is there than provision of protection to people and maintenance of the writ of the state? Why can’t we have some programmes that discuss the atrocities of the Taliban, acts of terror that they do and how they have destroyed Pakistan?
No, it’s not the “Hindu Zionists” working on a CIA/Mossad-sponsored conspiracy to break Pakistan. And for the sake of argument, even if they are foreign-funded, does that not mean we should double our efforts to counter them? Remember when India briefly occupied some land in 1965 and how the whole country rallied to defend this invasion? My grandfather had stories of people going with sticks to support the army. I am afraid I will not have any such stories of patriotic resistance to tell anyone when another enemy has taken control of, say, a fourth of the NWFP and roughly one-twentieth of Pakistan.
But remember the great Pakistani Fauj which, under the Ameer-ul-Momineen, Zia-ul-Haq, crushed the Russians? This is only a plan to make America taste the same fate! Yes, thank you Zaid Hamid. For a nation which already lives in denial, your conspiracy theories are all we need to turn us completely schizophrenic.
For the love of God, can anyone explain to me why the great army whose laurels we sing from the day we are born has still not been able to jam radio stations pouring terror in Swat? How is it that these Taliban leaders can appear before journalists in broad daylight and roam freely without any trouble even when they claim responsibility for a suicide bombing?
Perhaps the real question I should ask is, why do I even care? When I took time off from Harvard to be part of the lawyers’ movement I had seen a ray of hope. There were concerned citizens and lawyers who stood for what was right, no matter what the consequences. We fought for a principle and won, with the hope that things will slowly improve. Today the very judges we had faith in released the Lal Masjid cleric whose crimes everyone knows about. If the judiciary was going to release people whose crimes were recorded on TV, perhaps it does explain why the Taliban are growing popular.
Having said that, rays of hope like Afzal Khan Lala, who has refused to move from Swat while he is alive, appear every now and then. However, he stands alone in facing the storm. Other than Ayaz Amir, not a single Pakistani leader has spoken out against the Taliban. Will the real leader who can get rid of these monsters stand up, please? Imran Khan? Qazi? Nawaz Sharif? This silence is criminal!
What’s worse is that these leaders of ours have unanimously approved a state within a state run, which is not accountable to anyone, absolved the Taliban of all crimes and provided them a safe haven to kill more Pakistanis. The so-called Nizam-e-Adl Regulation was endorsed by the National Assembly without any proper debate.
The sad story, friends, is that the Taliban are here, and unless we stand up against them in every possible way, Pakistan will be lost for good. And it will not be lost because of Zardari’s real or perceived corruption or anything else like that, but because of the silence of the lambs – we ALL will be responsible if Pakistan fails.
The writer is a student at Harvard University and turned down an award from the US ambassador as a mark of protest against killings of Pakistanis by US drone attacks.
Email: [email protected]
HRCP concerned at misuse of ECL Saturday, 19 Dec, 2009
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/12-hrcp-concerned-at-misuse-of-ecl–bi-07
LAHORE: The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has expressed concern at the restrictions placed on certain people to travel abroad by putting them on the exit control list (ECL).
HRCP Chairperson Asma Jehangir said, in a statement on Friday, the commission was perturbed that the authorities had invoked the Exit Control List Ordinance which had never been accepted as a just measure.
The HRCP thinks the practice of restraining people from traveling abroad without issuing them prior notice and adequately explaining the reasons why the extreme measure was required which was a breach of the fundamental right of freedom of movement, as duly provided for in the Constitution.
She said the HRCP believed that even those facing trial in the court could not necessarily be barred from travelling to other countries and to prevent their escape the court might seek lawful assurance. The ECL had been used as a tool of political harassment in the past and has not served any purpose of bringing perpetrators of crime to justice. Any arbitrary use of the ECL under the cover of a judicial ruling would be no small a calamity. While legal course should be taken against those who plundered national wealth, the authorities should not commit excesses in their misplaced zeal for what they perceive as justice.
Another aspect of the judgment By Asma Jahangir Saturday, 19 Dec, 2009
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/another-aspect-of-the-judgment-929
The NRO case, Dr Mubashar Hasan and others versus the federation, has once again stirred a hornet’s nest.
There is thunderous applause for bringing the accused plunderers and criminals to justice and widespread speculation on the resignation of the president. Very little analysis is being done on the overall effect of the judgment itself.
While, the NRO can never be defended even on the plea of keeping the system intact, the Supreme Court judgment has wider political implications. It may not, in the long run, uproot corruption from Pakistan but will make the apex court highly controversial.
Witch-hunts, rather than the impartial administration of justice, will keep the public amused. The norms of justice will be judged by the level of humiliation meted out to the wrongdoers, rather than strengthening institutions capable of protecting the rights of the people.
There is no doubt that impunity for corruption and violence under the cover of politics and religion has demoralised the people, fragmented society and taken several lives. It needs to be addressed but through consistency, without applying different standards, and by scrupulously respecting the dichotomy of powers within statecraft. In this respect the fine lines of the judgment do not bode well.
The lawyers’ movement and indeed the judiciary itself has often lamented that the theory of separation of powers between the judiciary, the legislature and the executive has not been respected. The NRO judgment has disturbed the equilibrium by creating an imbalance in favour of the judiciary.
The judgment has also sanctified the constitutional provisions of a dictator that placed a sword over the heads of the parliamentarians. Moreover, it has used the principle of ‘closed and past transactions’ selectively.
It is not easy to comprehend the logic of the Supreme Court that in a previous judgment it went beyond its jurisdiction to grant life to ordinances — including the NRO — protected by Musharraf’s emergency to give an opportunity to parliament to enact them into law.
If the NRO was violative of fundamental rights and illegal ab initio, then whether the parliament enacted it or not it would have eventually been struck down. By affording parliament an opportunity to own up to the NRO appears to be a jeering gesture unbecoming of judicial propriety.
The NRO judgment has struck down the law also for being violative of Article 62(f), which requires a member of parliament to be, ‘Sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen’.
Hence, the bench will now judge the moral standing of parliamentarians on these stringent standards set by the notorious Zia regime. This article of the constitution has always been considered undemocratic and a tool to keep members of parliament insecure.
If parliamentarians, who also go through the rigorous test of contesting elections in the public domain, are to be subjected to such exacting moral standards then the scrutiny of judges should be higher still.
After all, judges are selected purely on the value of their integrity and skills. Judges who erred in the past seek understanding on the plea that they subsequently suffered and have made amends. Should others also not be given the same opportunity to turn over a new leaf? How will sagacity and non-profligate behaviour be judged?
Apart from Dr Mubashar Hasan, not even the petitioners of the NRO case are likely to pass the strenuous test laid down in Article 62 of the constitution. This could well beg the question whether it is wise for those in glass houses to be pelting stones.The judgment goes much further. It has assumed a monitoring rather than a supervisory role over NAB cases. In India, the supreme court directly interfered in the Gujarat massacre but it did not make monitoring cells within the superior courts.
Is it the function of the superior courts to sanctify the infamous NAB ordinance, the mechanism itself and to restructure it with people of their liking? It is true that the public has greater trust in the judiciary than in any other institution of the state, but that neither justifies encroachment on the powers of the executive or legislature nor does it assist in keeping an impartial image of the judiciary.
The long-term effects of the judgment could also be counter-productive; perpetrators are often viewed as victims if justice is not applied in an even-handed manner and if administered in undue haste with overwhelming zeal. It is therefore best to let the various intuitions of state take up their respective responsibilities because eventually it is the people who are the final arbiters of everyone’s performance.
’عدلیہ دائرہ کار سے تجاوز کر گئی ہے‘
علی سلمان
بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، لاہور
آخری وقت اشاعت: ہفتہ, 19 دسمبر, 2009, 05:25 GMT 10:25 PST
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2009/12/091219_hrcp_asma_as.shtml
عدلیہ کا کام ارکانِ پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات کی جانچ پڑتال نہیں
پاکستان انسانی حقوق کمشن کی چیئرپرسن عاصمہ جہانگیر نے این آر او کے بارے میں سپریم کورٹ کے فیصلے پر تبصرہ کرتے ہوئے کہا ہے ’عدلیہ اپنے دائرہ کار سے تجاوز کرگئی ہے اوریہ بہت ہی خطرناک بات ہوگی کہ سپریم کورٹ اراکین پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات پر فیصلے دے۔‘
عاصمہ جہانگیر نے بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام سے گفتگو کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ جس طریقے سے فیصلہ آیا اور مانیٹرنگ سیل بنائے گئے اور سارے اراکین پارلیمان کو ایک طرح سے وارننگ دی گئی کہ ان کے کردار کی چھان بین ہوسکے گی ’وہ سمجھتی ہیں کہ عدلیہ اپنے دائرے سے باہر نکلی ہے۔‘
انہوں نے کہا وہ اس بات کی توقع نہیں رکھتی تھیں کہ عدلیہ اب اس بات کی جانچ پڑتال شروع کردے گی کہ ممبران کے اخلاقیات کیا ہیں۔
عاصمہ جہانگیر نے کہا کہ اراکین اسمبلی تو الیکشن لڑ کر آتے ہیں لیکن جج تو اپنی ساکھ کی وجہ سے آتے ہیں اگر ممبران پارلیمان کے لیے معیار اتنا بلند کردیا جائے کہ کوئی اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے تو پھر عدلیہ کا معیار تو اس سے بھی بہت بلند ہونا چاہیے۔
انسانی حقوق کمشن پاکستان کی سربراہ نے کہا کہ ’یہ جوڈیشل ایکٹوازم نہیں ہے بلکہ عدلیہ اپنی اتھارٹی کو بہت زیادہ آگے لے گئی ہے۔اب اس نے مانیٹرنگ سیل قائم کرنے کی بات کر دی ہے۔یہ بھی دیکھا جائے گا کہ کس میکنزم کے مطابق کام ہوگا۔‘
’عدلیہ کی سپرویژن تو ہوتی ہے لیکن مانیٹرنگ سیل ہم نے آج تک نہیں دیکھا کہ اس طریقے بنائے گئے ہوں۔‘
انہوں نے کہا کہ وہ سمجھتی ہیں کہ تقسیم اختیارات کا نظریہ متاثر ہوا ہے۔’عدلیہ کو اپنے رویے پر غور کرنا چاہیے اس کا اپنا ایک مقام ہے اور اسے اپنے اس مقام پر واپس چلے جانا چاہیے۔وہ کسی خاص معاملے یا کیس میں اپنی دلچسپی نہ دکھائے۔‘
’وہ انصاف ضرور کریں لیکن یہ مخصوص نہ ہو بلکہ مساویانہ انداز سے ہونا چاہیے کیونکہ یہ نہ صرف ملک کے لیےبلکہ خود ان کے لیے بھی اچھا نہیں ہوگا۔‘
ایک سوال کے جواب میں انہوں نے کہا کہ وہ اس فیصلے کے خلاف اسی صورت میں اپیل کرسکتی تھیں جب اس عدالت سے بڑی بھی کوئی عدالت ہوتی۔انہوں نے کہا کہ سپریم کورٹ کے سترہ رکنی بنچ نے ایسا فیصلہ سنا دیا ہے جس کی کہیں اپیل بھی نہیں ہوسکتی۔
’انسان آخر انسان ہوتا ہے اس سے غلطی ہوسکتی ہے اسی لیے اپیل کا حق رکھا جاتا ہے۔ یہ بھی سوچنے کی بات ہے کہ اتنے بڑے فیصلے کردیئے جائیں اور اس کی کہیں اپیل بھی نہ ہوسکے۔‘
انہوں کہا کہ وہ یہ نہیں کہتیں کہ عدلیہ فیصلے نہ دے لیکن جو بھی کرے بہت سوچ سمجھ کر کرے۔
عاصمہ جہانگیر نے کہا کہ اس سے کوئی انکار نہیں کرسکتا کہ جن لوگوں نے لوٹ مار کی ہے ان کے مقدمات عدالتوں میں چلنے چاہیے اور یوں اجتماعی معافی نہیں ہونی چاہیے لیکن عدلیہ نے جس انداز میں فیصلے کیے ہیں اس پر انہیں تحفظات ہیں۔
دریں اثناء انسانی حقوق کمشن آف پاکستان نے ایک بیان جاری کیا ہے جس میں بعض افراد کے بیرون ملک نقل وحرکت پر پابندی کو بنیادی حق کی خلاف ورزی قرار دیا ہے اور کہا ہے کہ کمشن کو اس بات پر پریشانی ہے کہ حکام نے ایگزٹ کنٹرول لسٹ آرڈیننس کا اطلاق کردیا ہے جسے کبھی بھی منصفانہ نہیں سمجھا گیا۔کمشن کی سربراہ عاصمہ جہانگیر نے کہاکہ پیشگی نوٹس اور مناسب وجوہات بیان کیے بغیر پابندی عائد کرنا اس بنیادی حق کی خلاف ورزی ہے جس کی ضمانت ملک کا آئین دیتا ہے۔انہوں نے کہا کہ جن لوگوں کے خلاف عدلیہ میں مقدمات چل رہے ہوں ان کے بیرون ملک سفر پر پابندی عائد کرنا ضروری نہیں ہے ان کے فرار کو روکنے کے لیے عدالت میں قانونی سطح پر یقین دہانی حاصل کی جاسکتی ہے۔انہوں نے کہا کہ ایگزٹ کنٹرول لسٹ کو ماضی میں سیاسی طور پر حراساں کرنے کے لیےاستعمال کیا جاتا رہا ہے اور اب ایگزٹ کنٹرول لسٹ کا عدالتی فیصلے کی آڑ میں من مانے طریقے سے استعمال کسی آفت سے کم نہیں سمجھا جائے گا۔انہوں نے کہا کہ قومی دولت لوٹنے والوں کے خلاف جو قانونی کارروائی کی جارہی ہے وہ کافی ہے، حکام کو بے جا غصے اور جوش میں آکر ایسے ناجائز اقدام نہیں کرنے چاہیے جنہیں وہ انصاف سمجھتے ہوں۔
Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal of that 17 member bench against NRO during the proceedings had observed that NRO is against Quran and Sunnah. Supreme Court throws out NRO
Thursday, 17 Dec, 2009 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-text+of+the+supreme+court+order–bi-08
As per Islamic Law “Growing Beard” is compulsory and Justice Javed Iqbal or even CJ and other Islamic Type of Judges are clean shave rather they have Moustaches and that too of a kind which is Unlawful in Islam [I mean moustaches beyond your upper lips].
Moral Brigade in Judiciary should start following this in the light of Sunnah which they have exploited to condemn the NRO.
Shaving the beard is haraam because of the saheeh ahaadeeth that clearly state this, and because of the general application of texts that forbid resembling the kuffaar. One of these reports is the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar who said that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Be different from the mushrikeen: let your beards grow and trim your moustaches.” According to another report: “Trim your moustaches and let your beards grow.” There are other hadeeth which convey the same meaning, which is to leave the beard as it is and let it grow long, without shaving, plucking or cutting any part of it. Ibn Hazm reported that there was scholarly consensus that it is an obligation (fard) to trim the moustache and let the beard grow. He quoted a number of ahaadeeth as evidence, including the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) quoted above, and the hadeeth of Zayd ibn Arqam in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not remove any of his moustache is not one of us.” (Classed as saheeh by al-Tirmidhi). Ibn Hazm said in al-Furoo’: “This is the way of our colleagues [i.e., the Hanbalis].”
Is it haraam (to shave it)? Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The Qur’aan, Sunnah and ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) all indicate that we must differ from the kuffaar in all aspects and not imitate them, because imitating them on the outside will make us imitate them in their bad deeds and habits, and even in beliefs, which will result in befriending them in our hearts, just as loving them in our hearts will lead to imitating them on the outside. Al-Tirmidhi reported that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “He is not one of us who imitates people other than us. Do not imitate the Jews and Christians.” According to another version: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (Reported by Imaam Ahmad) ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab rejected the testimony of the person who plucked his beard. Imaam Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said in al-Tamheed: “It is forbidden to shave the beard, and no one does this except men who are effeminate” i.e., those who imitate women. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had a thick beard (reported by Muslim from Jaabir). It is not permitted to remove any part of the beard because of the general meaning of the texts which forbid doing so.
Moral Brigade should define the “Absence of Beard” in the light of Quran and Sunnah from the faces of the Members of Judiciary in view of their own set standards in the decision against NRO.
“quote”
Second, the short order found the NRO to be against Quran and Sunnah as it held the ordinance violative of Article 227, which says that all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such injunctions.
Dubious MPs to face the axe Thursday, December 17, 2009
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=26131
“unquote”
Right after the resignation of General Musharraf from the Post of the President of Pakistan, Mr. Athar Minallah the Chief Spokesman of Defunct Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary in Private Pakistani TV Channel [AAJ], demanded Treason Trial under article 6 of 1973 Constitutiuon of Islamic Republic of Pakistan while shamelssly forgetting that Athar Minallah, also served in the Musharraf cabinet for two years. Shouln’t Mr Athar Minallah be brought to Justice as well because abetting in a crime is tantamount to committing a crime. Athar was appointed Minister for Law, Local Government, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights by the Provincial Government of NWFP (2000-2002) by General Musharraf Military Regime.
The crackdown, announced late Saturday night after General Musharraf suspended the Constitution, was clearly aimed at preventing public demonstrations that political parties and lawyers were organizing for Monday. “They are showing zero tolerance for protest,” said Athar Minallah, a lawyer, and a former minister in the Musharraf government. Musharraf Consolidates His Control With Arrests By JANE PERLEZ
Published: November 4, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/world/asia/04cnd-pakistan.html?_r=1&hp
Athar Minallah joined the prestigious Civil Service of Pakistan (CSP) and after serving for 10 years left the post of Additional Collector Customs to join the firm as a partner. Athar Minallah brings not only rich taxation experience but also valuable scholastic input. Athar completed his law degree from the International Islamic University (Islamabad) and his LLM from University of Cambridge, UK. And his areas of interest are taxation, judicial review, Athar was appointed Minister for Law, Local Government, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights by the Provincial Government of NWFP (2000-2002). He also was the member of the Task Force constituted by the Federal Government for revamping the Taxation regime in Pakistan. Currently he is the member of the Policy Board of Intellectual Property of Pakistan and Chairman of Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee (ADRC) for Sales Tax constituted by the Central Board of Revenue.