• Friday, November 22, 2019

Ex-CJP calls Musharraf 'extremist' for slandering 60 judges

Discussion in 'Insaf - Justice' started by HAIDER, Jan 30, 2008.

  1. HAIDER

    HAIDER ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    20,285
    Joined:
    May 21, 2006
    Ratings:
    +14 / 18,768 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Jan 30 (AP): Pakistan's deposed chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry Wednesday branded President Pervez Musharraf an “extremist general” for sacking 60 top judges and keeping him and his family under house detention for the past three months. Iftikhar Chaudhry said in a statement his wife and three children were even forbidden from stepping onto the front lawn of their Islamabad home. In the statement, Chaudhry accused him of slandering judges during his recent tour of Europe. “Is there a precedent in all history, of 60 judges including three chief justices (of Pakistani Supreme and High Courts) being dismissed and arrested at the whim of one man?” Chaudhry wrote. “This incredible outrage has happened in the 21st century at the hands of an extremist general out on a 'charm offensive' of Western capitals and one whom the West supports.” Athar Minallah, senior Supreme Court lawyer who called the news conference, would not disclose how the statement was conveyed from Chaudhry. (Posted @ 15:05 PST)

    - DAWN - Latest Stories; January 30, 2008
     
  2. mujahideen

    mujahideen SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,407
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 54 / -0
    It is still not conformed that it was indeed the ex-Chief Justice who had to say this. These were the lawyers, claiming they are quoting on behalf of the ex-Chief Justice.
     
  3. mujahideen

    mujahideen SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,407
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 54 / -0
    The Chief Justice indeed needed to be removed.
     
  4. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    He makes the observation that it is a first that a lot of the judiciary has been sacked by a leader. It's happened before, but there is the equal observation that no CJ in the history of mankind has tried to manipulate the clear law of the Constitution in the way he has.
     
  5. araz

    araz PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,025
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Ratings:
    +58 / 9,567 / -0
    I disagree with you my friend. What the CJ did was well within the frame work of the law. The fact remains the he has the right to take suo motto notice of any event in the country. I know that times are difficult as we are in the midst of WOT. However, it still does not give us the right to incarcerate people without proof for years on end. I would have no qualms about a proven criminal suffering his punishment, innocent people being incarcerated is wrong no matter how you look at it. Mind you some of these guys had been in confinement for upto4 yrs. Ithing this whole fiasco boils down to the CJs refusal to ratify the second tenure of PM which again is purely illegal.
    WaSalam
    Araz
     
  6. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    The CJ afaik tried to say that Musharraf could not remove him from his CJ office whilst his trial was ongoing (the first time he got suspended). He's very wrong on this as was Ihtizaz Ahsan ("No one can dismiss or suspend chief justice of Pakistan according to the constitution, the august post of the chief justice is tenure protected"). He should know the Constitution of Pakistan easily, so the only conclusion is that he tried to manipulate and lie.

    Article 180.
    Acting Chief Justice.
    At any time when-
    (a) the office of Chief Justice of Pakistan is vacant; or
    (b) the Chief Justice of Pakistan is absent or is unable to perform the functions of his office due to any other cause,
    the President shall appoint [163] [the most senior of the other Judges of the Supreme Court] to act as Chief Justice of Pakistan.
     
  7. mujahideen

    mujahideen SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,407
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 54 / -0
    Iftikhar says he would assume job when freed

    By Ansar Abbasi

    ISLAMABAD: “The moment I am freed I will march to my office in the Supreme Court of Pakistan and assume my job,” a confident Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said on Wednesday, insisting that he was still the constitutional and legal Chief Justice of Pakistan.

    Talking to The News, Justice Iftikhar said if restricted, he would hold his court in open field along with other honourable judges of the Supreme Court, who had refused to take oath under the PCO on and after Nov 3, 2007.

    Full of resolve and determination, like always, Justice Iftikhar said that nothing constitutional and legal but only his illegal house arrest had barred him from attending his office. “As soon as I am free, I will go to my office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan.”

    He categorically said that he would not accept any condition attached to his release from the illegal confinement, which started on Nov 3 and was still continuing amid reports that the government was considering freeing him if he restricted himself from going to the Supreme Court.

    Rejecting any condition attached to his freedom, he said: “If today I, being the Chief Justice of Pakistan, bound myself to the unconstitutional orders of the chief of the Army staff, then tomorrow an inspector general of police might come up with his own constitutional amendments and order the arrest of any future chief justice of Pakistan.”

    He said after his release, he would go the Supreme Court and his brother judges who did not take oath under the PCO would accompany him. Simultaneously, Justice Iftikhar said the (deposed) judges of the high courts would also go to their respective high courts. He disclosed that he was in contact with his brother (deposed) judges, whose number was more than 50.

    Referring to his illegal detention, that of his family and his brother judges, he wondered if the top judges in any country had been treated in this manner anywhere in the world. He said such actions could not be accepted.

    Undeterred from the harshness of his and his family’s illegal detention of now over 110 days, Justice Iftikhar said the Nov 3 order of the seven-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by him, had already declared the PCO unconstitutional and had also restrained the judges of the superior judiciary from taking oath under the PCO.

    He said neither could the COAS amend the Constitution nor could he sack any judge. Justice Iftikhar said the whole nation demanded restoration of the pre-Nov 3 judiciary as had been proven in the Feb 18 elections. He declared that the future of the country could only be secured by constitutional rule and through institution building.

    He said he was under oath to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution and this could only be done by supporting the Constitution and the rule of law and resisting unconstitutional orders.

    While Justice Iftikhar is so clear about his “action plan”, the government believes that the deposed judges could only get back to their positions with the support of a two-third majority of the parliament.

    However, opposition voices and the legal fraternity do not agree with this interpretation and say that unless the new parliament gives indemnity to Musharraf’s Nov 3 and post-Nov 3 unconstitutional actions, no constitutional amendment is required to restore the deposed judges Some legal experts, including Aitzaz Ahsan, say a simple executive order can undo everything that has been unconstitutionally or illegally done in the past few months.

    Iftikhar says he would assume job when freed
     
  8. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    Musharraf is still the president. That's the main thing. Reserve orders are useful and might be enough to keep such looters in check. Anyway, this is an Ansar "drugged out" Abbasi article, which are usually hallucinations.
     
  9. asaad-ul-islam

    asaad-ul-islam SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,141
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 233 / -0
    man aren't these politicians something? they are just barking and screaming for power and attention:rolleyes:
     
  10. solid snake

    solid snake SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,176
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 48 / -0
    This does not give Musharraf the right to fire him. He was perfectly "able to perform the functions of his office" and the only "other cause" was that Musharraf fired him because he didn't like what the CJ was doing.
     
  11. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    Clueless. How can the CJ be a member of the SJC for his own trial?

    The CJ cannot be a member of the SJC for his own trial, so he cannot perform the duties of his office, since Article 209 [2], states that the SJC is composed of the CJ and other judges.

    Article 209
    (2) The Council (SJC) shall consist of,
    (a) the Chief Justice of Pakistan;
    (b) the two next most senior Judges of the Supreme Court; and
    © the two most senior Chief Justices of High Courts.


    How can CJ be a member of the jury for his own trial?. Answer that if you can.
     
  12. Karma

    Karma BANNED

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    SS is talking about the sacking of the judges, while they were about to deliver the verdict of Musharaf's reelection as a president. How this action is based on constitution?
     
  13. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    How is he referring to the sacking of judges and not the CJ?

    :crazy:
     
  14. roadrunner

    roadrunner PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    5,696
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,611 / -0
    Looking at the Constitution, I would say it is Constitutional of him to have gone and fired the judges.

    181. Acting Judges.
    (1) At any time when-
    (a) the office of a Judge of the Supreme Court is vacant; or

    (b) a Judge of the Supreme Court is absent or is unable to perform the functions of his office due to any other cause,
    the President may, in the manner provided in clause (1) of Article 177, appoint a Judge of a High Court who is qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court to act temporarily as a Judge of the Supreme Court.

    [164] [Explanation.-In this clause, 'Judge of a High Court' includes a person who has retired as a Judge of a High Court.]

    (2) An appointment under this Article shall continue in force until it is revoked by the President.


    So he revoked their appointment..he doesn't even need to give a reason or consult anyone according to this. Just fire them.
     
  15. solid snake

    solid snake SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,176
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 48 / -0
    Who said he had to be?

    I'm saying the particular laws you pointed out which call for the appointment of an acting CJ says that one can only be appointed in case the CJ is unable to perform his duties.

    The CJ did not have to be on his own trials jury, the other judges on the bench could have done that.

    Also, how come Mushy decided to fire the CJ just as decision on the legality of Mushy's presidency was to be made? Also a decision on the privitization of the Steel Mills.