Analysis by Abdul Nishapuri – from another thread:
In Hamid Mir’s talkshow, Capital Talk, on 22 December 2009, Ali Ahmad Kurd expressed three key reservations about the current Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of Pakistan:
1. CJP and other judges of the Supreme Court are populist. They read daily newspapers, watch TV talk-shows and then shape their decisions / verdicts consistent with the ‘popular demand or expectations’.
2. CJP and other judges of the SC are rushing the current lopsided process of justice (aimed against one specific person, i.e. President Zardari), and in the rushed process, justice is likely to be crushed.
3. Kurd noted that it was being forecast by certain circles (e.g. Dr Shahid Masood and Shaheen Sehbai) that the Supreme Court will announce an important decision (against PPP) in December 2009, something which actually happened. Why this coincidence? (Why did the agents of establishment against democracy happen to know exact dates?)
Asma Jahangir too, in the same program of Capital Talk, expressed her reservations about the inclusion of Article 62 etc, related to Islamic provision of Ameen etc for the eligibility to be a member of parliament, in the Supreme Court’s judgement. She termed the judgement as poorly reasoned, politically biased, resembling a tribal jirgah style judgement instead of a due process of justice.
Judges deciding cases on media lines: Kurd
Daily Times Monitor
LAHORE: Judges of the higher judiciary are making up their minds about cases after reading newspaper headlines and watching TV shows, former president Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Ali Ahmed Kurd said on Tuesday.
Describing the present situation as “justice hurry and justice worry”, Kurd deplored the fact that the judges were visiting and addressing the bars and said they would have to “prove themselves worthy of their positions”.
According to Kurd, judges in the United States neither read newspapers nor watched TV programmes, but focused only on their work.
Kurd unhappy over SC verdict on NRO
By Iftikhar A. Khan
Wednesday, 23 Dec, 2009 (Dawn Report)
The judgment appeared to be based on newspaper headlines and talk shows of private TV channels: Ali Ahmed Kurd.
ISLAMABAD: Ali Ahmed Kurd, the firebrand leader of the lawyers’ movement and former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, who has been keeping quiet for quite some time, surprised a lot of people on Tuesday with his blunt criticism of the way the Supreme Court was behaving. Judges should “behave like judges”, he said.
Speaking during a talk show on “Challenges facing the judiciary”, he said that people had reservations about the verdict handed down by the Supreme Court on petitions challenging the National Reconciliation Ordinance.
According to him, the judgment appeared to be based on newspaper headlines and talk shows of private TV channels.
Mr Kurd said that an independent judiciary had been restored after a great struggle, adding that the country would become stronger if the judiciary acted in the manner expected by the nation during the struggle. “If it does not happen, it will cause a blow to national security.”
He said he had been invited by various bar councils after the restoration of the judiciary, but he preferred to keep quiet. He said he did not attend functions where the chief justice had been invited and quit his practice as a lawyer in the Supreme Court. It was astonishing to see judges visiting bar councils, he added.
Mr Kurd described the National Judicial Policy as detrimental to the judicial system. He pointed out that a deadline of Dec 31 had been set for courts to decide cases. He said the maxim of ‘justice hurried is justice buried’ would turn out to be true in many cases because these, including cases of murder and dacoity, and the rights of defence and the practice of producing evidence of many people would be compromised due to paucity of time.
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Chairperson Asma Jehangir also criticised the Supreme Court’s judgment on the NRO and said it appeared to be a decision pronounced by a ‘jirga’.
She was of the opinion that the NRO could have been declared null and void by merely declaring it as repugnant to Article 25 of the Constitution, but a Pandora’s box had been opened by the court. Syed Iqbal Haider and Justice (retd) Tariq Mehmood also spoke on the occasion.