What's new

Enough with democracy, welcome martial law?

I am all for it....

Problem with zaid , is he keeps arguing whatever was thrown on him, but even with his out of focus comments on some issues, he is still a better threat detector thn all of our security & paid political analysts.

We have reach to a point , where any politician or any political party can't do much about it, & surly its now & never thing?

^^^He is self appointed life time CJ.
He has political support of all politicians, incl. Gillani whom he favored with creative sentence of 30sec.
& imran & nawaz !
He is using imran at least, imran was used by him before too! Hope u remember?
 
Close Pakistan borders like Iran and kick the ***** of Zardari clan and make them speak on TV.

Before they got shipped out to their second home UK.
STop dreaming dude, come to real world.

i would sugest a brutal killing in front of media! to all of them including this cj!
So you want some thing like brutal killing of Qaddafi and hanging of Sadam to be repeated in Pakistan as well.
 
our point of view doesnt matter, its the point of view of people asa genral that matters, and lets face it most of the people support either PML N or PPPP and generously voted for PPPP previous time. remeber this isnt an issue of education,last time i checked educated people also voted for PPPP and are planningt o vote for PML N this time
 
PEW research poll
Most Muslims Want Democracy, Personal Freedoms, and Islam in Political Life | Pew Global Attitudes Project
2012-AS-01.png

2012-AS-02.png

2012-AS-03.png

2012-AS-04.png

2012-AS-05.png

2012-AS-06.png

2012-AS-071.png

82% Pakistanis want to strictly follow Quran
 
And when martial law comes then again start shouting for democracy....and cycle goes on.
 
Democracy in Pakistan in run &owned by the US, they select the political parties & they make them win so that these spineless leaders can help them achieve their corrupt objectives & aims.

In this corrupt system no politician can work without US aid & watch.

To HELL with the Democracy & yes to Martial Law.
 
Democracy in Pakistan in run &owned by the US, they select the political parties & they make them win so that these spineless leaders can help them achieve their corrupt objectives & aims.

In this corrupt system no politician can work without US aid & watch.

To HELL with the Democracy & yes to Martial Law.




it is going to be 5 TIME in the history of pakistan that democracy has failled!
& i guss its enough!




thanks for the great contribution sir!
this thread is going to become a history in PDF, within some time!
plz keep posting things, like you had posted now!
good luck!

STop dreaming dude, come to real world.


So you want some thing like brutal killing of Qaddafi and hanging of Sadam to be repeated in Pakistan as well.

sir, there is no Z A BHUTTO around, he was the one who you can bet for, but this crunnt lot is ruthless oppresors!
they deserve that?
 
Fascism as democracy
By: Jalees Hazir | July 15, 2012 | 0
Fascism as democracy | The Nation

The Contempt of Court Bill 2012 was presented in the National Assembly and the Senate, passed by the two houses without much debate and signed into law by the President, all in the span of four days last week. The new law is a naked attempt to save government functionaries from the consequences of disobeying court orders and slinging mud on the honourable judges, and it is expected to be deployed to save the neck of Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, who is following the footsteps of his disqualified predecessor in refusing to follow the unambiguous order of the Supreme Court in the NRO implementation case. Several petitions have challenged the new law in the apex court for violating at least five articles of the Constitution and the Pakistan Bar Council has announced that lawyers will observe a black day to protest against this latest attack on the independence of judiciary on July 23 when the petitions are fixed for hearing. Meanwhile, the PPP wallahs and their one-eyed supporters have kicked up a spurious debate on parliamentary supremacy to obfuscate a clear matter.It is hard to understand the position of these apologists of the Zardari regime. They would like to wish away the constitutional responsibility of the higher judiciary to strike down laws that violate the Constitution and give unbridled authority to the parliamentary majority to do as it pleases, with no regard whatsoever for the constitutional framework within which it is meant to operate. They would like us to believe that, once elected, Parliament could behave like a monarch.Interestingly, these ‘progressive’ apologists and jiyalas of PPP, who do not tire of mouthing platitudes in favour of democracy, are using the outdated concept of absolute supremacy of Parliament to essentially defend a law that is clearly discriminatory and flouts the basic principle of equality before law on which the entire edifice of democracy stands. They have no love for Parliament where it really matters.The manner in which the Contempt of Court Bill 2012 was rushed through the National Assembly and the Senate actually amounts to contempt of Parliament, which is supposed to debate and refine any legislation before passing it. Those waving flags of parliamentary supremacy have no problem with Parliament being used as a rubberstamp by unelected leaders of political parties. They conveniently forget about the real power of Parliament when it is reduced to dancing to the tunes of agendas set by these big bosses in meetings behind closed doors. They have no problem when the consensus resolutions and recommendations of the same Parliament are trashed by the so-called democratic government. They don’t see the power of Parliament being compromised by illegally elected parliamentarians, who lied about their dual nationalities and submitted fake degrees to contest elections. They don’t see bogus votes chipping away the authority of Parliament. It is a bit strange that their love for Parliament is awakened only when its unconstitutional actions are challenged in the Supreme Court.Last time we were lectured about parliamentary supremacy was when the Speaker of the National Assembly overstepped her constitutional authority to save her party’s Prime Minister from disqualification, over-ruling the order of a seven-member Supreme Court bench. And this time, the concept has been brought to life to defend a patently undemocratic and unconstitutional law, rushed through Parliament for the benefit of the new Prime Minister and those in positions of power. Obviously, the one-eyed champions of democracy are more interested in supporting the devious power-play emanating from the presidency in the name of Parliament, rather than upholding a democratic ideal. Their hypocritical posturing around the misleading concept of parliamentary supremacy kicks into action selectively and they go all-out to defend the Zardari regime with an antiquated theory that goes against the grain of our Constitution.The trichotomy of power envisaged by our Constitution has no room for the absolute supremacy of Parliament that these one-eyed champions of democracy harp upon. The Constitution is clear about the authority of the judiciary to strike down any law made by Parliament that violates the Constitution. It is the constitutional responsibility of the judiciary to interpret the Constitution as well. And no elected government or Parliament could take away these constitutional powers. Even if every political party in Parliament decides to take away these powers, they could not do it through a Parliament that has been elected under the existing Constitution. So Parliament is restricted to act within the confines of the constitutional framework. Only a Constituent Assembly elected with the mandate to change this framework and come up with a new Constitution could undertake such an exercise.The present hullabaloo around the concept of parliamentary supremacy is clearly designed as a weapon against the independent judiciary to make it ineffective. How could the judiciary fulfil its duty if it is rendered powerless when it comes to the President, Prime Minister, Governors, Chief Ministers and Ministers? The message is clear: those in positions of power stand above the law and are under no obligation to obey the orders of the courts. They are allowed to flout court orders, even ridicule and malign the honourable judges without any fear of being punished. This is the latest battle in Zardari’s long war against the judiciary that has continued ever since Benazir Bhutto was murdered and he took over the PPP. The various ways in which he tried to stop the restoration of the sacked judges and subvert it after restoration are all well known, regardless of the false pronouncements about respecting the judiciary routinely made by the PPP government.The intellectual poverty of our so-called progressive intelligentsia when it comes to issues of democratic governance is reflected in their biased formulations that make no distinction between the ideals of democracy and the fascistic order being fashioned by Zardari in the name of democracy. They are willing to twist any concept to suit the power interests and justify the power games played by their Machiavellian philosopher king.
The writer is a freelance columnist.Email: hazirjalees@hotmail.com
 
no no no ...
never ever welcome marshal law.. we donot want them to sale pakistan anymore to americans or mujahadeens or seminaries..
if a pm is not obeying let the court punish him.. anfd if this coalition is not working well then according to rules it should be dismissed and new democratic govt should be elected ..
with one or two rules under thugs democracy will be returned to country .. its media and information age .. its not danda age ..freedom of speech is enough to bring the corrupot into the court and if courts are fair they will convict ...

its bizarre when people look into military as the saviour instead of rule of law
 
Ministry fails to produce ISI’s political cell notification :tdown::angry:
DAWN.COM | 14 hours ago

Ministry fails to produce ISI

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday resumed the hearing in the case involving alleged disbursement of millions among anti-PPP politicians by the political cell of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) before the 1990 general election.

A bench of the apex court comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain was hearing the 1996 petition of Tehriq-i-Istiqlal’s chief Asghar Khan regarding allegations of the ISI’s financing of politicians to prevent the victory of the Pakistan People’s Party.

During the hearing, Chief Justice Iftikhar said that all found involved in the payout would be held accountable.

Moreover, the defence ministry failed to produce the notification about the setting up of the ISI’s political cell.

The chief justice inquired of Attorney General Irfan Qadir as to why the political cell’s notification had not been produced before the bench.

The attorney general said that the notification, which was issued 39 years ago, had not yet been found.

The chief justice said the notification should be in the Gazette of Pakistan, adding that being the country’s chief law officer, Qadir should assist the court in this regard.

The chief justice moreover inquired the attorney general over the response of the defence ministry over the notification.

Commander Shahbaz, representing the ministry, said that it did not have a copy of the notification.

Moreover, Asad Durrani, the-then director-general of the ISI, said that a friend of his had shown him the notification’s copy.

During the previous hearing, Chief Justice Iftikhar had vowed to take the case to its “logical conclusion” and had asked Commander Shahbaz to furnish a copy of the missing notification.

Moreover, Asad Durrani, the-then director-general of the ISI, said that a friend of his had shown him the notification’s copy. Also during the previous hearing (held on June 22), Durrani had told the court that of Rs140 million more than Rs60 million was disbursed by the ISI among various politicians and the rest of the amount was deposited in a special account.

Durrani had also said that the first order for disbursement was given by the then-army chief, Gen (retd) Mirza Aslam Beg, and the subsequent ones came from the election team of then-president Ghulam Ishaq Khan that included Ijlal Haider Zaidi and Roedad Khan.

CJP rules out Bangladesh model
Last Updated On 16 July,2012 About 10 hours ago

Dunya News: Pakistan:-CJP rules out Bangladesh model...

Ruling out the much talked about Bangladesh model, he said all efforts should be directed to strengthen democracy. We should blame ourselves for our own weaknesses, he added.

A three-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry heard Asghar Khan case today. The case is against political funding by the ISI in the run-up to 1990 elections.

The apex court has adjourned hearing of the case for two weeks.
 
Chief Justice is responsible for the crisis – by Sikandar Mehdi :tup::agree:

Chief Justice is responsible for the crisis – by Sikandar Mehdi | Indus Asia Online Journal (iaoj)

Justice (r) Fakhurddin J Ibrahim, a respected jurist also known to have close relationship with Nawaz Sharif & PML-N has very different opinion of CJs’ ruling while PML-N & PTI are trying to ride on the back of judiciary. On this program he openly criticized judiciary but after he left the show the ultimate Legal Expert Dr. Shahid Masood criticized him with some lame and frivolous examples.

Our media is acting like Toilet Paper of judiciary especially. Everybody criticized Iftikhar M****l except Pakistani media. All international media and especially Indian SC judge has openly criticized this Clint Eastwood style of Justice (Clint Eastwood had no PCO oath and definitely no son like Arsalan). Since the judicial coup not even a single international outlet has praised the decision but rather labelled it as ” REVENGE DECISION”. This farce called judiciary is bent on taking PPP government down but instead they are making heroes out of fallen leaders. Mr. Iftikhar m****l no matter what you do, you can never legally become president or the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Your wish can only be served by illegal means. It is matter of discussion, want you want to name it Bangladesh model, revolution, judicial restraint, National interest, but between you and the whole world, it will still be ILLEGAL.

Media pundits who have continuously spread right wing pro Taliban/Al-Qaeeda agenda are now the Legal experts too. Our supreme court is in hyper drive with Dual core Pentium 10 processor to derail democracy or at least weaken it. First I was of the opinion that instead of having all this democratic set up and continuous military interruptions, why not make COAS to be president of the country but now I think why not make CJ the president of the country and let him run this bloody show. Forget Bangladesh model, make a new Pakistani model. After 62 years of independence we are still searching for damn models. We had military governments, we had imported PM’s governments, we had technocrat governments, we had lota governments, we had Ameer ul Momineens and why the not this new thing. We love experimentation what the heck, have this Judge be the president, CJ, PM and do what ever he wants to do with this unfortunate country self proclaimed Fort of Islam, leader of Ummah country. Mr. CJ go a head and make Mullah Omar the president of country if it serves you better.

As the time goes by I fail to see any light left for democracy in this hell bound country. First this weak political government couldn’t provide par excellence governance but rather a bad performance, then on top of it we have this PCO loving judiciary backed by media and right wing political parties harking to shut down this democracy-wemocracy bullshit.

This social fibre of this country was destroyed by uneducated bearded mullah with its out of the world interpretation of religion and now we have this bloody new kind of BUFOONS ***** and **** who are interpreting constitution for us. God help us.


Faisla Aapka - 26th June 2012 - Part 1 - YouTube
 
CJ shall take notice of open corruption in judiciary.

No ruling is possible without bribe and CJ is the biggest fish.
 
CJ shall take notice of open corruption in judiciary.

No ruling is possible without bribe and CJ is the biggest fish.

CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry should be asked to appear before Parliamentary Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges

In the light of recent commentaries by leading Pakistani and international lawyers including but not limited to Asma Jahangir, Justice Markandey Katju [Listen Justice Markandey's interview at BBC urdu] (Indian Supreme Court), Saroop Ijaz etc, it is evident that Supreme Court of Pakistan has violated not only national constitution but also attacked the very foundation of parliamentary democracy in Pakistan.

Former Indian Supreme Court judge Justice Markandey Katju, writing in The Hindu recently, questioned what he said was the “lack of restraint” on the part of Pakistan’s superior judiciary. Justice Katdue wrote: “In fact, the court and its Chief Justice have been playing to the galleries for long. This has clearly gone overboard and flouted all canons of constitutional jurisprudence”. He said that Article 248, Clause 2 of the Pakistani Constitution very clearly states: “No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or governor in any court during his (or her) terms of office”. He then went on to ask that if this is the case, how could a court approach what is a settled provision in the “garb of interpretation”?

The Pakistan Constitution draws its basic structure from Anglo-Saxon laws, which establishes a delicate balance of power among the three organs of the state — the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. However, in recent past, particularly since April 2012, Pakistan’s top judiciary led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has encroached into the elected parliament’s domain. This situation is not only a violation of Pakistan’s constitution but violates privilege of the elected parliament.

In his desire to become a saviour and hero of Pakistan, CJ Chaudhry has become a tool in the hands of politicians and media, and is through his actions and verdicts hurting Pakistan’s very security and stability.

Lawyer Saroop Ijaz writes:


The Pakistan Supreme Court has sent an elected prime minister home. This in itself is disturbing, however, permissible it may be under some circumstances. What is infinitely more worrying is the fact that the Supreme Court did not feel itself constrained by the procedure of law. The argument that the order of the Speaker cannot overrule the Court is a very decent one, yet does not explain why the Court ignored the clear provisions of the Constitution to send the matter to the Election Commission of Pakistan. There is also the issue of the three-member bench making a mockery of the seven-member bench. However, there is a vaguely linear progression to all of this. The Supreme Court terminated the employment of “PCO” judges without reference to the Supreme Judicial Council, which was allowed to go unexamined. More recently, when memberships of members of parliament were suspended for dual nationality, again without reference to the Election Commission of Pakistan, not enough noise was created. Demagogy has a tendency of being incremental sometimes; they have tested the waters and now found it appropriate for a splash. It is likely to get worse now, it always does.

Even now there is a curious reluctance to unequivocally condemn, or mildly speaking, criticise the judgment of the Supreme Court. Yousaf Raza Gilani and his maladministration is not the issue here, the issue is considerably more fundamental, namely the right of the people to elect their representatives and also to send them home. The Supreme Court does not represent the will of the people and the Courtrepeatedly saying so to the contrary would not change that. Let me also say this about the law of contempt, if the Court in fact does believe that it represents the will of the people then it will have to make its peace with the fact, that people talk and also talk back.

It is high time that Pakistan’s parliament, not only ruling PPP but also other parties (PML-Q, ANP, MQM, JUI-F etc), require Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to appear before the Parliamentary Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges to explain his position on supremacy of elected parliament.

CJ must be asked to explain why he is insisting on violation of Pakistan’s constitution and also why he is insulting the mandate given by the people of Pakistan to their elected parliament. The Committee should ask CJ why he wants elected Prime Minister to violate Article 248 of Pakistan’s Constitution (related to President immunity). A legal analysis of Article 248 and the presidential immunity – by Babar Sattar | LUBP

The Parliamentary Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges must ask Justice Jawad S. Khwaja & other judges of the SC to explain their alleged past and present links with Hamid Khan Group of PTI who was a petitioner in PM Gilani’s disqualification case.

The Parliamentary Committee should require CJ to assure he won’t force Pakistan’s current Prime Minister (Raja Pervez Ashraf) and other members of the executive to violate Pakistan’s constitution. He must also assure that Supreme Court will refrain from further trespassing into the parliament’s domain.

In case, CJ is unable to satisfy the Parliamentary Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges, SC may be dissolved and reformed as per the Charter of Democracy (CoD) signed by late Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. The CoD offers best path to reconstitute the Supreme Court consistent with the essence of parliamentary democracy. In such a scenario, Pakistan’s Supreme Court may be reconstituted just like Senate, assuring equal representation of all ethnic groups (not domiciles), also making sure that no PCO judge (i.e., one who has in the past validated a military coup or endorsed dictator’s actions) is a part of the Supreme Court or lower judiciary in provinces.

Courtesy: LUBP

CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry should be asked to appear before Parliamentary Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges | LUBP
 
Back
Top Bottom