This is now getting ridiculous.

PMLN judge khalil rehman ramday will get another year as adhoc judge ,what a joke,sc asking democratic govt to remove officers on contract and itself recommending 2 Judges on contract.Khalil ramday son mustafa ramday getting alot of cases from punjab govt, Rmday associates family law firm of khalil ramday is favourite firm of Punjab govt , Khalil ramday’s nephew Raza farooq was advocate general of punjab govt till his death last year, khalil ramday brother choudry farooq was attorney general in Nawaz sharif’s last govt and opened cases against Benazir bhutto in Switzerland.Asadul rehman another brother of khalil ramday is the EX-MNA of pmln ,he contested on pmln ticket from Lahore in last election but lost the seat.Mustafa ramday himself admitted in media that he got Rs2.5 million from punjab govt for fighting cases for them in courts.What can you expect from this pmln family?

So now the Judges themselves will give each other extensions? Who is the judiciary accountable to or are they going to be like dictators and do what they please?

Now all the attention is on raymond davis issue and you’lll see that cj will keep the nation and government on ransom again.

Ramday to get rare second extension
http://epaper.dawn.com/ArticleText.aspx?article=15_02_2011_005_010
Dawn, February 15, 2011
ISLAMABAD, Feb 14: Veteran Supreme Court judge Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday will get a rare second extension as ad hoc judge following a proposal adopted at a full court meeting here on Monday.
According to a legal source, the proposal also sought the appointment of Justice Rahmat Hussain Jafferi as an ad hoc judge, who had reached superannuation on Nov 22 last year.

Justice Ramday’s one-year extension expires on Feb 16. But it is not yet clear whether the extension will be for six months, a year or more than a year.

A late-night announcement by the Supreme Court said that Chief Justice Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, who presided over the full court meeting, had proposed to request the two judges to rejoin the bench as ad hoc judges, which was unanimously agreed. Both the judges, it said, had accepted the proposal in “wider institutional interest”.

At the outset, the meeting welcomed newly-elevated judges — Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Justice Amir Hani Muslim — who were sworn in as SC judges in the morning. With their elevation, the Supreme Court’s sanctioned strength of 17 has been completed.

The source said that after the 19th Amendment the chief justice could seek the appointment of a judge of the same court as an ad hoc judge in consultation with the Judicial Commission (JC) constituted under the 18th Amendment. However, the condition of an approval by the eight-member Parliamentary Committee required under the 18th Amendment is not necessary in this case.

The Article 182 which was amended in the 19th Amendment says: “If at any time it is not possible for want of quorum of judges of the Supreme Court to hold or continue any sitting of the court or for any other reason it is necessary to increase temporarily the number of judges in the Supreme Court, the chief justice in consultation with the JC may in writing with the approval of the president, request any person who has held the office of a judge of that court and since whose ceasing to hold that office three years have not elapsed, to attend sitting of the Supreme Court as ad hoc judge for such period as may be necessary and while so attending the ad hoc judge shall have the same power of jurisdiction as a judge of the Supreme Court.” Reacting to the news, Supreme Court Bar Association President Asma Jehangir said: “I am quite surprised that Justice Ramday is being given another extension.” It was not even appropriate for a judge to attend a meeting where a proposal for ex tension of his service as ad hoc judge was being made, she told Dawn.

“I had an invitation with me to attend a full court reference in his (Justice Ramday) honour followed by a farewell dinner,” she said, adding that the SCBA had even arranged a lunch in his honour which seemed not necessary now after the announcement.

“We need to firm up a system for getting confirmation of judges in the superior judiciary because ad hoc judges are appointed only in exceptional cases, but here I don’t find any exceptional situation for Justice Ramday’s continuation as ad hoc judge,” Ms Jehangir said.

It would have been more proper if the appointment was made on the suggestions of bar associations than by the Supreme Court itself, she said, adding that such appointments had created controversy in the past.

“It is very surprising if the full court has passed the resolution to grant one more extension to Justice Ramday because the full court reference in his honour is scheduled for Feb 17.

“An invitation for the dinner hosted by the Supreme Court in honour of the judge has already been issued and a lunch to be hosted by Asma Jehangir on Friday has also been finalised,” senior Advocate Tariq Mehmood told Dawn.

Last year when Justice Ramday was recalled by the chief justice to serve on the bench for one more year, he wrote to the latter that he would not draw any salary and it should be deposited directly in the account of AlMizan Foundation — the organisation set up for the benefit and welfare of serving and retired employees of the Supreme Court.

DISPOSAL OF CASES: The full court also devised a methodology to speed up disposal of cases. Many ideas were discussed and the meeting decided that the category of cases as formulated in the National Judicial Policy would be followed for fixing cases.

The cases relating to recovery of government revenue and tax, rent, family, stay, women, juvenile and service matters will be given top priority. Benches will be designated to hear specific categories of cases. Two benches will start working in Lahore next month. Regular benches will also be sent to branch registries on a rotation basis.

The full court noted that due to increased credibility of the judiciary more people were approaching courts for justice.

Is this guy for real. And today he is making hue and cry ordering the govt to immediately sack the adhoc appointees. Good lord. Is there no body to show him the mirror in the court and tell him that you have gone completely bonkers.

REAL FACE OF A JUDGE

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

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.

Kurd unhappy over SC verdict on NRO By Iftikhar A. Khan Wednesday, 23 Dec, 2009 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/12-kurd-unhappy-over-sc-verdict-on-nro–bi-09 Judges deciding cases on media lines: Kurd Daily Times Monitor Wednesday, December 23, 2009 http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\12\23\story_23-12-2009_pg7_12

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. – 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.

ISLAMABAD: Terming the headline —’CJs express concern over judges security; threats from admin’ — of a news report, regarding the security related meeting, that appeared in The News on Sunday as misleading, the Supreme Court office, in its press release issued here, has clarified the same as under: “It is clarified that the above-mentioned caption is misleading in so far as it gives the impression that the judges of the Superior Courts have direct clear threats from administrative officials, which is not the true reflection of the issue discussed in the above mentioned meeting nor the press release issued in this regard refers to any such threats. In fact, the meeting discussed the security related situation in view of the purported information ‘emanating from administrative authorities’ in relation to the alleged plot to target the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Lahore High Court as mentioned in the report of the Special Branch of the Government of Punjab. “Unfortunately, your above-mentioned captions portray the totally different message as if the Hon’ble judges of Superior Courts are being threatened by the administrative officials, which is not the case. It is expected that an appropriate clarification may please be published prominently, preferably at the same spot on the front pages of the two newspapers in order to set the record straight.” REFERENCE: SC clarification Monday, September 20, 2010 Shawwal 10, 1431 A.H. http://www.thenews.com.pk/20-09-2010/Top-Story/712.htm

Watch in the video below, Abbas Ather reveals without naming that it was a newspaper (Jang Group’s (Geo TV’s) newspaper The News) which had first spread a false rumour about the denotification of the Supreme Court judges on 19 January 2010. Try to search that news item via Google. And lo and behold. There is actually a news story in The News on that date. But there is a small problem here. The story has been removed from The News website; most probably very recently. No plan to withdraw judges’ restoration notification – 19 Jan 2010 … ISLAMABAD: There is no plan to withdraw the notification issued on March 17, 2009 for the restoration of deposed judges, including Chief … http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=26750 [even the cache which is usually available is not available]

Abbas Ather’s conversation with Asma Jahangir in today’s Column Kaar (16 October 2010)- Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNmgi5dL7EY

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

عدلیہ کا کام ارکانِ پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات کی جانچ پڑتال نہیں
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

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۔

PAKISTAN: International Commission of Jurists http://www.icj.org/IMG/pdf/pakistan.pdf

The independence of the judiciary was largely undermined by the order by General Musharraf in January 2000 that Pakistani judges take a fresh oath of loyalty to his administration. In May 2000, the Supreme Court, reconstituted after the dismissal of six judges who refused the oath, upheld General Musharraf’s military coup of 1999, under the doctrine of state necessity. Pakistan is a constitutional republic. On 15 October 1999, the Government promulgated the Provisional Constitution Order, (PCO), No.1 of 1999, overriding the 1973 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, previously suspended following the 12 October 1999 military coup led by General Pervez Musharraf. The PCO provided for the suspension of the National Assembly, the Provincial Assemblies and the Senate and mandated General Musharraf to serve as the new Chief Executive.

On 20 June 2001, General Musharraf became President of Pakistan after dismissing the incumbent President, Muhammad Rafiq Tarar. On 12 May 2000, the Supreme Court validated the October 1999 coup under the doctrine of state necessity. However, the Court ordered that the Government hold national and provincial elections by 12 October 2002. In response, President Musharraf presented a four-phase programme aimed at returning the country to democratic rule, with local elections to be held from December 2000 until August 2001. Subsequently, a series of local elections were held in December 2000, March 2001, May 2001 and July-August 2001. However, political parties were prohibited from participating in the contests and party leaders were disqualified from holding political office.

Land allotments: Verbal orders trump proper procedure Rauf Klasra Published in The Express Tribune, November 27th, 2010.

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.

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.

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.

Saturday, November 27, 2010, Zilhajj 20, 1431 A.H
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/nov2010-daily/27-11-2010/main.htm

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=20103\17\story_17-3-2010_pg7_1

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/

Justice Chaudhry allotted plot soon after 2002 elections

ISLAMABAD: The accountability body of the Parliament, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), has received an official report from the Housing Ministry that shatters an eight-year-old perception that the incumbent Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) has never been given a piece of land by the government.

CJP Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was allotted a one-kanal plot during former President General Pervez Musharraf’s reign – which he owns to date in Islamabad’s residential sector G-14/4.

Though it was recently reported that a number of judges – including several former chief justices of Pakistan such as Riaz Ahmed Sheikh, Ajmal Mian, Irshad Hassan Khan and others – had been allotted plots in Islamabad since 1996, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was the only name not seen in the lists.

It was also widely disseminated through the media that the incumbent chief justice had not been given a plot. However, an allotment to the CJP was made soon after the 2002 general elections – which took place after the Supreme Court had endorsed the October 12, 1999, coup and gave sweeping mandate to General Pervez Musharraf to amend the Constitution. A list compiled by the housing ministry of plot allotments to bureaucrats, judges and journalists spread over hundreds of pages, available with The Express Tribune, shows that Justice Chaudhry, then a Supreme Court judge, was given a one kanal plot on Dec 18, 2002 – six days after his 54th birthday.

The official documents further reveal that the then CJP Sheikh Riaz Ahmed was also allotted a plot on Dec 17, 2002, while two judges of the Lahore High Court, Justice Faqeer Mohammad Khokar and Justice Mumtaz Ali Mirza were also allotted plots in G-14 on the same day.

The report about the allotment of plots was submitted by the housing ministry after the Public Accounts Committee chairman Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan had issued directives to furnish a list of all those who were allotted plots in Islamabad since 1996.

Interestingly, Nisar did not seek a list of such allotments from 1991 when Nawaz Sharif, his party’s chief, had first become the prime minister. He also did not direct the ministry of defence to submit a list of land allotted to military generals who have been regularly getting agricultural land in the fertile areas of the country, the Seraiki region in particular, at a rate of under Rs180 per acre.

One official was of the opinion that Nisar did not issue such instructions as he has a military background himself. His father was recruited during the colonial period and his brother Lt. Gen. Iftikhar Ali Khan served as defence secretary during Sharif’s government.

However, the papers presented before the PAC reveal that, unlike the other 15 judges of the SC, Justice Chaudhry did not take a second plot in Islamabad. This despite the fact that under the revised policy of the government, approved by then prime minister Shaukat Aziz, he and his colleagues were entitled to two plots. CJ Chaudhry also did not apply for a plot under the curious recent scheme of the “Prime Minister Assistance Package”, meant exclusively for judges – unlike the 17 other judges of the Supreme Court who got plots through this scheme.

The present government is said to have also offered to allot a second plot to the CJP – but he has declined the offer. At the time of his refusal, it was widely reported in the media that he did not own any plots in Islamabad – a ‘fact’ that has now, given the official list of the housing ministry, been rebuffed.

Pakistan’s Chief Justice Takes on its Political Class By RANIA ABOUZEID / ISLAMABAD Saturday, Mar. 27, 2010 http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1975646,00.html

To his supporters, and there are many, Pakistan’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is a hero, a man of honor who stood up for an independent judiciary and defied the diktats of former President Pervez Musharraf — and who continues to hold the political establishment accountable. To his detractors, however, Chaudhry is an activist jurist with unbridled powers, a populist with grandiose political ambitions. In a country where politics can get very personal, the Chief Justice’s relationships with the pillars of civilian and military power, President Asif Ali Zardari and Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Kayani respectively, could be important in shaping Pakistan’s transition from de facto military rule to civilian democracy. And those relationships are likely to be tested in the tussle over a package of wide-ranging constitutional reforms that was due to be introduced to parliament on Friday, whose purpose is to reverse changes made by previous military rulers, trim the power of the presidency, and alter the procedure for Supreme Court appointments. The bill would take Supreme Court appointments out of the hands of the president, who now makes nominations after consulting with the chief justice, and place them before a government legal committee that also includes several justices. Unlike the present system, judges would have to be confirmed by a parliamentary vote. The proposed reforms have widened the rift between Chaudhry and the government that has grown since the Chief Justice last year struck down amnesty decrees by Musharraf that protected many senior figures in government — including Zardari himself once out of office — from prosecution on corruption charges. And some saw the Chief Justice’s hand in the eleventh-hour stalling of parliamentary debate on the package on Friday by opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, who objected to proposals on the selection of judges. Sharif’s opposition, some senior politicians suggest, results from being pressured by Chaudhry, who is allegedly opposed to having his own power in the selection of judges curtailed. “The chief justice threatened [Sharif]. He said he’d open up all cases against him,” a senior leader of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party said on condition of anonymity. “He’s become an absolute dictator.”

On the contrary, says a legal expert at the Supreme Court and Chaudhry associate speaking on condition of anonymity, the conflict is caused by the “government [wanting] a chief justice and court which is compliant, not independent.” The standoff over how judges are selected could have far-reaching implications in a political order feeling its way towards democracy, with the different branches of government are “attempting to first stretch the bounds of their authority and second, to learn how to work with each other,” says Samina Ahmed, Pakistan director for the International Crisis Group, a global policy-research center. “The problem in Pakistan has [historically] been with the military’s intervention, transitions have been disrupted, and the judiciary in the past has supported every military intervention.” But as the two civilian branches of government tussle over their powers, neither appears to have clear backing from the military, whose preferences are often decisive. Still, some Pakistani media commentators suggest that the generals may be colluding with the judges to limit the power of government, already groaning under the weight of the president’s sagging popularity. They point to a stalled but soon-to-be-reopened Supreme Court case that accuses intelligence agencies of using the “war on terror” as a pretext to secretly detain thousands of citizens suspected of links to Baluchi separatists and other radical groups. The local Dawn newspaper reported last month that Supreme Court Justice Javed Iqbal said that the court “would not like to create the impression that it was out to destroy or tarnish the image of intelligence agencies” with regard to these cases. Chaudhry had in 2007 begun to investigate the issue of Pakistanis alleged to have disappeared into secret custody before he was deposed by Musharraf, and had ordered members of the security forces to produce several of the missing in court. Now, some media commentators are suggesting that Chaudhry is retreating from that fight. Chaudhry’s supporters deny the claim, and say that the court will not shy away from prosecuting any security officials who have broken the law. Whatever the outcome of the particular battles over constitutional powers and various court cases, what remains clear is that Justice Chaudhry, while holding an office that is ostensibly above politics, will remain in the thick of it.

Shame on CJ and Shame on Ansar Abbasi Published June 9, 2009 Articles http://fkpolitics.wordpress.com/2009/06/09/shame-on-cj-and-shame-on-ansar-abbasi/

We all heard about the recent meeting between CJ and Holbrooke that made no sense.

Well here is a meaningless @ss-covering being provided by none other than Ansar Abbasi:
Holbrooke-Iftikhar meeting approved by FO

Tuesday, June 09, 2009 By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: The meeting of US Special Envoy on Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke with Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was held following advice of the foreign office to the Supreme Court’s registrar.

‘Medal of Freedom’ or Slavery??
‘Medal of Freedom’ or Slavery??

While the meeting led to many tongues wagging, with some drawing their own conclusions and raising questions that in cases stretch out to the limits of conspiracy theories, it was neither a one-on-one meeting between the two nor anything bypassing the government’s foreign ministry.
Foreign Ministry sources as well as the registrar office of the Supreme Court confirmed to The News after the Supreme Court registrar received a request from the US embassy for Holbrooke’s desire to call on the chief justice of Pakistan, the matter was referred to the Foreign Ministry for advice.

The Foreign Ministry in its advice said the chief justice in his convenience could meet the visiting US special envoy and his delegation.The Foreign Ministry also deputed its two senior officials to be part of the Justice Iftikhar-Holbrooke meeting which, besides these foreign office officials, was also attended by Supreme Court Registrar Dr Faqir Hussain from the Pakistani side. Holbrooke was assisted by the US ambassador and members of his delegation.

Sources said Holbrooke told Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry that the purpose of his call was to pay a courtesy visit to the top judge of the country, who led a successful judicial movement in Pakistan.

Holbrooke, a foreign ministry source said, also disclosed to the chief justice US Secretary Hillary Clinton, who herself was a prominent lawyer, wanted him to meet Chief Justice Iftikhar during his visit to Pakistan. Holbrooke said he had come to the chief justice to pay his respect to the man, whom he had once watched on the television screen waving to the people after his release from house arrest last year.

Holbrooke said he has also been reading a lot about the efforts at ensuring speedy justice in Pakistan. During the meeting, Holbrooke also inquired about the judicial system of Pakistan, relationship between the judiciary and executive, the application of Islamic and common laws, etc.

The chief justice informed Holbrooke about the salient features of the recently-implemented National Judicial Policy and said the country’s judiciary is today independent. He also emphasised the need of separation of the judiciary from the executive and said the independent posture of the judiciary is a must.

Justice Iftikhar said the judiciary’s foremost effort is to end the backlog of cases and ensure quick justice for which the recently implemented National Judicial Policy is the first major step. The chief justice was also of the view that an independent judiciary is imperative for good governance, economic growth and development of the society.

Foreign Office sources said nothing regarding any particular case pending before the Supreme Court, including that of the missing persons or the NRO, came under discussion in the meeting.

That’s the best they have come up with so now you know there is more to the story.

Ansar

First of all Mr. Abbasi, you yourself state “the meeting led to many tongues wagging” (BTW: I think what you meant was “the meeting led to many jaws dropping”) so you you know it was for a valid reason — the meeting was totally inappropriate. So of course you cannot blame people for raising questions and it is dishonest of you to try and dismiss it as “conspiracy theories.”

Second, you state it was not a one-on-one meeting. That is not the issue. The issue is why was there a meeting at all? Of course you don’t answer it which shows you have no answer. Someone said “cj is not pakistan ambassador or foreign minister. he is a judge and it does not become him to discuss a sub-judice matter with a foreigner that too somebody he believes is a party to the case,” and I agree. Of course the writer is referring to earlier reports that the missing persons case was on the table. In fact it was the Registrar of the Supreme Court himself who stated:

‘Matters relating to judicial reforms as per national judicial policy and the whole judicial structure of Pakistan were discussed‘

(Remember this is a statement by the same Registrar — which we are now supposed to ignore — who “approved” this meeting — an excuse we are supposed to accept. (Does any one know if it is the the Registrar who holds so much sway as to who the CJ is supposed to meet and who to ignore??? I don’t think so!!!)

So stating now that no such thing happened is A BOLD-FACED LIE and Ansar is being a party to spreading this lie.; I also agree with Teeth Maestro when he states: “for matters of dignity and norms the Chief Justice should not have met a political official of the US Government, which has been responsible for kidnappings and ‘externments’ from Pakistan to say the least.”

its like a judicial martial law, no one is dare to ask any question.everyone is so scared of suprem court.they created so much fear in people.some body needs to ask mr ramday about his morality when teachs morality to people in court.They threaten people of jail on small matters in court and no one is dare to say ok send me to jail .

Will Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry quash case the against Sherry Rehman and earn displeasure of his support base, the jihadi mullah, right wing media and military establishment? I seriously doubt that! This is the fate of all those who want to support the establishment’s agenda of jihadism but oppose its proxy, the mullah. Sherry is not the first or last to be victim of her own contradictions. But again, it is a decision by ‘the independent judiciary’ and ‘must be respected’. Criticism on court decisions will undermine the ‘independence of judiciary’ – were not we being told the same by Aitzaz Ahsan, Sherry Rehman and their FCS followers when it was President Zardari and other leadership of PPP being victimised by the same judiciary?

Foot in Mouth Award 2010: Justice Ad-hoc Khalil ul Rehman Ramday Thursday, October 14, 2010 http://green-goats-hide.blogspot.com/2010/10/foot-in-mouth-award-2010-justice-ad-hoc_14.html

The Foot in Mouth award is awarded each year by the Plain English Campaign for a baffling comment in English language by a prominent figure. The comment can be inappropriate for being queer in grammar or content or both. The English proverb after which the award is named, ‘foot in the mouth’, simply means a distasteful or foul oration. The proverb I believe is self explanatory. It further goes without saying that if similar award was to be given in Pakistan, despite tough competition from Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khwaja Sharif, the outright winner would be Justice Khalil ul Rehman Ramday. While all of his golden quotes can fill volumes, some select few and their apparent fallacy or foolishness have been reproduced here to impress his exemplary personality upon the readers.

Not few days ago,

Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday said in his remarks, ” the courts had been left with no task but to pocket insults.” October 2010

So sir, you do finally realise your public standing? Had you paid a bit more attention to serving the people of Pakistan than focusing on lynching their elected representatives day and night, you would be receiving some accolades, but since you are not doing so, enjoying your well deserved share of insults.

He also observed,

“CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was held by hair and dragged, but we did not take any action. Whenever such an incident takes place, a strategy is adopted with wisdom. We did not take revenge on anyone for what happened with us after March 9, 2007,” October 2010

Are you suggesting that in following the course of law you did me or the people of Pakistan a favor? The fact that why the Chief Justice of Pakistan did not get a FIR registered is another matter.

Another member of the bench, Justice Ramday said that wherever judges try to raise their heads, they are immediately showered with hammers. September 28, 2010.

When did they raise their heads? Can you quote one incident other than 9th March? Also, may I suggest that you refrain from basking in CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudry’s glory, using it to put yourself on a pedestal.

Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday said: “We judges cannot sit as silent onlookers if someone is committing suicide before us.” 30 September, 2010

What?! Didn’t you guys do exactly that during the eight year Mush rule? Yes, before your sudden awakening! When all the banks, flour, sugar and rice mills, stocks in power plants, PTCL, KESC and many other institutions had been given away in shady privatisation deals and stock market had crashed twice.

These two quotes both part of the 18th amendment case proceedings, in response to different arguments pertaining to the amendment with respect to appointment of judges.

Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday remarked that the judiciary was separated and detached from the executive, but now the latter’s role was being enhanced while in the UK, the executive’s role was minimised in appointments.

“Judge is appointed by the Senate in US. But here in Pakistan ground realities will have to be looked into,” Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday remarked.

So sir, do you think people of Pakistan are stupid? We are not ignorant fools, heads-I-win, tails-you-lose is not going work. Be ethical and pick a side.

Justice Ramday cited in a judgment that Article 248 came up for interpretation in Ch Zahur Ilahi’s case (PLD 1975 SC 383), which stated the scope and the operational area of the said provision as “…the immunity provisions must, in accordance with the accepted principles of interpretation, be construed strictly and unless persons claiming the immunity comes strictly within the terms of the provisions granting the immunity, the immunity cannot be extended. The immunity is in the nature of an exception to the general rule that no one is above the law.”

The matter was further explained thus: “Hence, since neither the Constitution nor any law can possibly authorise him to commit a criminal act or do anything which is contrary to law, the immunity cannot extend to illegal or unconstitutional acts.”

Okay, so the immunity extends only when you convict people for actions permissible under law, got it!

On the formation of a judicial commission Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday said, during a hearing

‘Thank God that our ministers and bureaucrats are honest and angels. The sheer fault lies only with the judges; hence, they must be set right.’

No sir they aren’t but the bureaucracy is not (directly) governed by the Constitution, hence their appointment was not covered in the eighteenth amendment. Seems you missed out on some crucial lessons at law school. As for the ministers, why do you question their eligibility, did you yourself not say in Court that it was up to nation to decide to whom they wanted to see as judge or otherwise. So why do you not honour their decision when it is not in your favour.

At a different date he further remarked,

The judiciary had rendered sacrifices, judges faced detention and hunger along with their children and had to let go numerous competent brother judges by way of the July 31 verdict (for taking oath under the PCO) only to save the democratic system. But, he said, the hands of the same judiciary were being tied.

Honourable sir, you with your fellow lordships suffered four months of detention in your house with your families. This was done at the hands of a dictator whom you strengthened and served unconditionally for eight years. For such support you deserve a minimum of life imprisonment. Moreover, while you walked hand in hand with the dictator, hundreds of politicians and political workers were tortured until they changed loyalties.

Should your logic be accepted why don’t you give the political leadership of the country a free pass they have earned as per your logic? Each one of them has sacrificed more than the entire judiciary put together.

But above all his quote for which he truly deserves an award is his outright admission in the Court, ten days before the 3rd November emergency, while Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan was pleading the case of Justice Retired Wajihuddin.

“I am not ashamed if I had taken the oath under the PCO,” Justice Ramday observed. “We have made our country, its institutions and the Constitution a matter of laughing stock in the world.” He said that whatever ‘burble and verbal jugglery’ might be behind the changes made since 1977 in the Constitution, the country had been ruled under the Constitution.“But we sit here and waste days and weeks trying to understand (interpreting things).”

Sir, this was at the peak of the historic lawyers movement. You had the audacity to not only defend your oath under the PCO but also question why should you be ashamed. One is forced to wonder that had you been offered an oath by Musharraf again, would you have stood by Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry?

While, his lack of shame on committing treason deserves recognition, it is for his persistent shamelessness two years on that we award him Foot in Mouth.

Justice Ramday recalled that, “all the validations accorded by the judiciary were temporary in nature, but asked why the one who committed treason by abrogating the Constitution and the institution (parliament) which indemnified such actions had not been touched, but the judiciary was being singled out unnecessarily.”

“All the subsequent abrogation and martial laws were not only accepted by the people but also given permanency by political leaders,” the judge regretted.

He said the 8th Amendment was one such example when the 1985 parliament indemnified all extra-constitutional actions taken by Gen Ziaul Haq.

“Why did the parliamentarians not stand up by refusing to validate Ziaul Haq’s martial law if the judiciary had given a wrong decision in the Nusrat Bhutto case?” Justice Ramday asked. He also cited the Zafar Ali Shah case in which the judiciary had given three years’ time to Gen Pervez Musharraf to hold elections.

Mr Ramday in his desperation has forgotten that the eighth amendment ratification by the sham parliament was challenged by Benazir Bhutto in Courts as it was un-Constitutional for being even the house so elected was unicameral in nature. He has also forgotten the non-partisan elections of Zia, the low voter turnout and the suppression of people by the dictator. Both the eighth amendment and the seventeenth amendments were carried out by parliaments which were a result of heavily rigged elections, yet you would go to any length to deny any blame on your part.

For all the above comments and your lack of shame in putting such thoughts into words, you deserve Pakistan’s first Foot in Mouth Award. Congratulations!!

The issue of extension in service or reappointment of officers after retirement has become highly controversial since the verdict of the SC on the appointment of retired officials on contract basis in the civil bureaucracy. However, the SC itself is not seen as applying the same principle within its own institution. The number of additional judges recommended by the JC for the LHC has raised many an eyebrow. On the other hand, the proposal to give an extension to two retired judges — Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Justice Rehmat Hussain Jaffery — in the SC on an ad hoc basis has been criticised by the Pakistan Bar Council, the Supreme Court Bar Association President Asma Jahangir, and other lawyers’ forums. They have demanded an end to the culture of ad hocism. If there is a need, the number of permanent seats of judges could be increased instead of hiring retired judges. How can the judiciary expect other institutions to follow a principle it is not ready to accept for itself?

Are Court Reporters Impartial – Part – 1 (Apna Gareban Matiullah Jan DAWNNEWS) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_FooDuR7xs

Are Court Reporters Impartial – Part – 2 (Apna Gareban Matiullah Jan DAWNNEWS) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20gCIcVGVUg

Are Court Reporters Impartial – Part – 3 (Apna Gareban Matiullah Jan DAWNNEWS) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q50L87plP-I

Are Court Reporters Impartial – Part – 5 (Apna Gareban Matiullah Jan DAWNNEWS) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GgE7XQR-xI

Wonderful article! We are linking to this great post on our website.
Keep up the good writing.

Feel free to visit my blog post; 30th birthday ideas [Tiffany]

Hellߋ, yes this piece of writing is really nice andd
I have learned lot of tҺings fгom it on the topikc of blogging.
tɦanks.

Feel free tߋ visit mʏ web-site :: cost of keyword research

Ԍreat article. Ι am dealing wіth many օf thse issues аs well..

Нere is my site – Keyword Research For Organic Search

Нi, i tɦink tҺat i noticed yߋu visited my weblog thus i got
heгe to go bacκ thе favor?.I am trying to in finding things to enhance my site!ӏ assume itѕ gooԁ enougҺ tо use a
few oof your concepts!!

my blog post; Keyword Research Discovery

Ԍreetings fгom Loss angeles! I’m bored tο tears at work sߋ I decided to browse your site
on mʏ iphone duгing lujch break. Ι love the info ʏou provide
here and cɑn’t wait to tɑke a loοk whеn І get home.
І’m surprised аt how quick your blog loaded оn my mobile
.. I’m not evesn usіng WIFI, ϳust 3G .. Αnyways, fantastic site!

Αlso visit mʏ web page :: http://salontj.com/xe/?document_srl=443600

I’m now not cеrtain ѡhere ʏou’re getting үouг info,
howevеr ցreat topic. Ι must spend sօme time finding out morе or
understanding morе. Thankѕ fоr excellent info ӏ uѕed tօ be searching for this infoгmation fօr my
mission.

Alsoo visit mʏ website: keyword research mac os X

I juѕt coսld not gο ɑway your web site prior to suggesting tҺat I
rеally loved the standard іnformation a person supply to ƴoսr
visitors? Is gonna bе again regularly to inspect
neԝ posts

Lоoқ at mƴ webpage … keyword research broad exact phrase

ӏ eѵery time emailed tҺis blog post pqge tο all my friends, sіnce іf like
tο read іt afterward mʏ contacts ԝill tօo.

my web pаge :: Keyword Research

Thanks fоr ѕome otɦer fantastic post. Wheгe else maƴ just anyone get thаt ype of information in such an ideal methhod օf writing?
I’ve a presentation neҳt week, and ӏ аm on tɦe search for sսch іnformation.

Feel free tto surf tߋ my web site; Keyword research myths

Heey theгe! Do you know if thgey maҟe any plugins tߋ assist ѡith
SEO? I’m trying to get my blog to rank fߋr ѕome targeted keywords but I’m not sеeing very good gains.
If youu қnow oof any please share. Kudos!

Stopp bу my weblog Top 10 Keyword Research Software

I likе it whеn individuals get togetther аnd share opinions.
Ԍreat site, continue tɦe goօd woгk!

my site how To do keyword research For amazon Products

Hello my family membеr! I աish to say that this article is amazing, nice written aand imclude ɑlmost ɑll impߋrtant infos.
I’d like to peer extra posts lіke thіs .

ңere iѕ my web blg – you compare car insurance

You ϲould cеrtainly ѕee yߋur enthusiasm ѡithin tҺe wߋrk уou write.
Τhе sector hopes forr even morе passionate writers sujch аs you who are not
afraid to say hօw tɦey belieѵe. At all times go after your heart.

Hеre is myy weblog easy keyword research

I tɦink that еverything posted made a great deazl օf sense.
But, thіnk on thiѕ, suppose you were to
wrikte a awesome headline? I ain’t ѕaying your іnformation isn’t good., but
what іf you added ɑ title to mahbe grab people’s attention? І mean Fսll Court Reference recommendss
Khalil Ramday ffor оne more yea – Azad Adliyha Zindabad is kinda boring.

Υou oսght tօ glance at Yahoo’s front page аnd note how theƴ create post headlkines tօ
grab viewers tо click. You miight try adding a video or ɑ гelated pic orr
tѡo to ǥet readers excited аbout everything’ve written. In my opinion, itt miyht mаke yߋur blog ɑ lіttle bit mߋre
interesting.

Μy homepage :: How To Do Keyword Research With Google Keyword Tool

I am trսly plleased to read tҺis web site possts ѡhich includes lots ߋf սseful factѕ, tɦanks
for providing such statistics.

Мy ƿage – Keyword research for clients

Yеs! Finally ѕomeone writes ɑbout website keyword гesearch tools.

Review mу pagе – Monteklearningsolutions.Com

I’m trսly enjoying the design annd layout
of ʏour blog. It’s a verʏ easy on the eyes whiсh mɑkes it much mօre pleasant fօr mee to сome Һere and visit
more often. Did yoս hire out ɑ developer tօ create үouг theme?
Grеat work!

Taƙe a looκ at my weblog – what is Keyword research and analysis

Whеn ѕomeone writes an paragraph hе/she maintains thhe thoսght of a user іn his/her mind that how a user сan understand it.
Thսs that’s why thiѕ paragraph іs greаt. Thanks!

Review my weblog keyword research for small businesses

Do you haѵе a spwm issue oon thіs website; I alszo am а blogger, ɑnd I was
wanting to know youг situation; mɑny of սs havе created ѕome nice practices аnd we are looking tto trafe
solutions witҺ other folks, be ѕure tо shoot me аn email іf interested.

My web page … presenting keyword Research