Pakistan's Supreme Court has been traditionally allied with the Punjabi-dominated military establishment against elected governments.
Make so much noise that everything becomes inaudible-then people would hear what we want them to hear. This is how the Pakistani Establishment is controlling the game at the moment – It is very clear who is who, and what is what. But because of a concentrated effort to remove the current Government and head of state, all the other noises and all other logic is being drowned.
Today the Supreme Court of Pakistan has given the Government six options to remedy the NRO decision. Yes you heard this right, Courts are now providing multiple answer type option to their decisions. I am not aware how this would work in future, would this be that decisions would be given to murders they have six choices, varying degrees of punishment and even a possible acquittal. We provide, you decide.
Court has stated following options:
Option 1: Court would move against the Prime Minister, President and Law Minister because they were ‘harping’ that they shall not write a letter to Switzerland, and this equates to violating the court’s order they have violated their oath to office and so are not worthy of the office.
The Honourable Judge states that Prime Minister made these claims in the floor of the House and Senate. Honourable Judge has made many references to Quran, but perhaps has oversight over Article 69 of The Pakistan constitution that explicitly prohibits any scrutiny of statements made on the House floor. The said speech is non-justiciable in any court as it as it was made in the floor the house – How has there been such an oversight is amazing.
President made a similar statement in an interview with Hamid Mir – Be that may, Only way to remove a President is through Article 47 of the constitution, i.e. two-third majority of the Parliament.
Option 2: The Prime Minister and the Law Minister would be held to have made contempt of court, virtue of which both Gentleman could lose their membership of Parliament, and their office along with it.
Though again Article 63 (1) (g) (ridiculing Judiciary or Armed Forces) is mentioned, though again Article 69 defence should apply. Thus only 63 (1) (h) is applicable.
Option 3: Supreme Court would form a commission under Article 187 that shall execute the said relevant decision.
Option 4: Immunity to President under Article 248 has NOT YET BEEN DISCUSSED and if anyone seeks to discuss this in the court, they may do so.
In any case, it is highly astonishing thus far that court has not heard anything under Article 248 presidential immunity, which one would have thought is a highly important defense available to the Government against writing the letter.
Option 5: NAB chairman has failed and protected the accused, namely Ahmed Riaz Sheikh, and Adnan Khawja who have been appointed wrongly and to take actions against Malik Qayoom.
Option 6: Court may ask the Parliament to take such steps as it sees fit to ensure that court’s judgement is implement
It is not clear what court means about handing over the implementation to the Parliament. Does the court expect a resolution by the parliament would suffice, which would first form a commission to ensure implementation and the the said commission can advise parliament of way it has ensure implementation .