It's too ridiculous to invoke Article 62 & 63." - Imran Khan

[Zibago]

 

[krash]

Yes you can declare all liers as liers.... and if its public such person can't run for parliament until he clear him self, convincingly.

P.S.: my remarks are general, not specifically about IK

They are all lairs man, starting from Nawaz all the way to IK. In fact, we are all lairs, the whole nation.

 

[Long.Live.Pakistan]

 

[Zibago]

Muk gaya modi ka show nawaz ro nawaz ro nawaz

https://www.facebook.com/

 

[Long.Live.Pakistan]

Muk gaya modi ka show nawaz ro nawaz ro nawaz

https://www.facebook.com/

GO ABASSI GO
برگروں اور پیسٹریوں کے لئے ٹرک کی نئی بتی

 

[Zibago]

GO ABASSI GO
برگروں اور پیسٹریوں کے لئے ٹرک کی نئی بتی

WO to aya hi janey key liye hey us ney to nawaz ko company deney adiyala an hy chand mahino mein tension kiyon letey ho

 

[Finer]

Burden of proof cannot be on the accused in all types of accusations.

That is what i thought. In fact, i debated extensively on this. But Article 62, and 63 changed the whole story apparently. It is those articles that just sealed the fate of Nawaz Sharif might continue the trend to others as well.

Imran Khan could be asked to take DNA test confirming whether he is father or not of the kid that is born out of wedlock. I know it is personal affair but not in front of Article 62/63 as character testament apparently, and certainly not when it comes to Pakistan concerning the matter of leadership. Meaning people could argue that the man who hesitates to acknowledge the kid legally cannot be trusted to run Pakistan legally.

With Article 62/63, it is other way around as in the accused party to prove the allegation wrong with the evidence; DNA test. I am not fan of article 62/63 as i prefer the good old policy as in 'innocent until proven guilty', but Pakistan is different case.

 

[BATMAN]

They are all lairs man, starting from Nawaz all the way to IK. In fact, we are all lairs, the whole nation.

Not only liers but munafiq too.... Pervez Musharraf was disqualified for not honoring one of his statement of returning to Pakistan, which he may have made on some TV program. All hypocrite nation kept quite on the judgment, without thinking karma will come to haunt them one day.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

That is what i thought. In fact, i debated extensively on this. But Article 62, and 63 changed the whole story apparently. It is those articles that just sealed the fate of Nawaz Sharif might continue the trend to others as well.

Imran Khan could be asked to take DNA test confirming whether he is father or not of the kid that is born out of wedlock. I know it is personal affair but not in front of Article 62/63 as character testament apparently, and certainly not when it comes to Pakistan concerning the matter of leadership. Meaning people could argue that the man who hesitates to acknowledge the kid legally cannot be trusted to run Pakistan legally.

With Article 62/63, it is other way around as in the accused party to prove the allegation wrong with the evidence; DNA test. I am not fan of article 62/63 as i prefer the good old policy as in 'innocent until proven guilty', but Pakistan is different case.

I am asking you a simple question how can anyone take dna sample from a child who is a foriegn nationale without the childs consent? What if Shahbaz sharif is also accused to be the father and he fails to get a dna sample from the same child? Does that mean the child now has two fathers ? We can keep on increasing the list of accused men to be the allegd father and all will fail to get DNA tested as the childs dna cannot be collected who is not in Pakistans jurisdiction.

Article 62 63 was applied to NS due to non declaration of all his assets i.e fze company. NS accepted in court that he is the chairman and eligible for salary hence an asset ... but it was not declared in his nomination papers and the court considered this lying/not truthful i.e. you said these are all my assets but infact they weren't.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Well then the same could be said about financial corruption. Every single politician is corrupt (both financially and morally) so then per IK's logic we should not hold anyone responsible for financial corruption also.

You-turn khan know that he could easily disqualified under article 62 especially someone involved in zina which is major sin

Yea tu app farishte bitha dein..insanoo k uppor applicable nhi kyoon k sab phunsey ghey..
Imran khan lol

So i want to know what youthyan say on this ?

 

[Finer]

I am asking you a simple question how can anyone take dna sample from a child who is a foriegn nationale without the childs consent? What if Shahbaz sharif is also accused to be the father and he fails to get a dna sample from the same child? Does that mean the child now has two fathers ? We can keep on increasing the list of accused men to be the allegd father and all will fail to get DNA tested as the childs dna cannot be collected who is not in Pakistans jurisdiction.

Article 62 63 was applied to NS due to non declaration of all his assets i.e fze company. NS accepted in court that he is the chairman and eligible for salary hence an asset ... but it was not declared in his nomination papers and the court considered this lying/not truthful i.e. you said these are all my assets but infact they weren't.

But Article 62/63 is applicable in many ways, character testament is one of them which does apply nonetheless despite how absurd that sounds. But it is article 62/63 which appears to transcend the concept of innocent until proven guilty. To the extent, the allegation to dispel boils down to the accused party now.

Not to disagree with you but it is not really my call since the pattern is there which suggests Article 62/63 can expand to more political leaders in regards to leadership.

For Imran Khan, it might be Sita related because of history which may disqualify Imran Khan hence his hesitant to acknowledge the kid born out of wedlock if true can threaten his political career.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

But Article 62/63 is applicable in many ways, character testament is one of them which does apply nonetheless despite how absurd that sounds. But it is article 62/63 which appears to transcend the concept of innocent until proven guilty. To the extent, the allegation to dispel boils down to the accused party now.

Not to disagree with you but it is not really my call since the pattern is there which suggests Article 62/63 can expand to more political leaders in regards to leadership.

For Imran Khan, it might be Sita related because of history which may disqualify Imran Khan hence his hesitant to acknowledge the kid born out of wedlock if true can threaten his political career.

If its proven in court that IK has an illegitimate child then yes that can become a basis for his disqualification as well. But the problem here is how are you going to prove this in court? Currently it is only an accusation. You and one other member said that DNA test can be used to prove the biological relation, to which I asked how the DNA sample from the child can be collected who is not even a Pak citizen? And I still haven't got a reasonable answer ... I guess you also know thats not going to be possible.

Now you are coming up with an illogical argument of burden of proof on being IK, and that failure to get DNA test will mean that IK is actually the father ... to which I am telling you that is not how relationships are established between humans. Not being personal here, but as an example you cannot be considered an illigetimate child of your neighbor until there is a dna test to prove otherwise, and your refusal to provide a dna sample wouldn't mean the accused man/Neighbour will be considered guilty and as your biological father.

Regards

 

[Finer]

If its proven in court that IK has an illegitimate child then yes that can become a basis for his disqualification as well. But the problem here is how are you going to prove this in court? Currently it is only an accusation. You and one other member said that DNA test can be used to prove the biological relation, to which I asked how the DNA sample from the child can be collected who is not even a Pak citizen? And I still haven't got a reasonable answer ... I guess you also know thats not going to be possible.

Now you are coming up with an illogical argument of burden of proof on being IK, and that failure to get DNA test will mean that IK is actually the father ... to which I am telling you that is not how relationships are established between humans. Not being personal here, but as an example you cannot be considered an illigetimate child of your neighbor until there is a dna test to prove otherwise, and your refusal to provide a dna sample wouldn't mean the accused man/Neighbour will be considered guilty and as your biological father.

Regards

Clearly, you don't understand the concept of Article 62/63 which transcends the method of innocent until proven guilty. It is other way around focusing on the accused party to dispel the accusation with the evidence. That is what sealed the fate of Nawaz Sharif in the first place through Article 62/63.

Not the argument, but the concept is unfathomable. Nonetheless, the concept does exist due to the courtesy of Article 62/63. All it takes one case to appeal against Imran Khan to dispel the accusation since it is matter of political leadership which does take Article 62/63 into the account. So yes, it is opposite of innocent until proven guilty. Surely that is not hard to understand, does it?

Keep in mind that i am not fan of Article 62/63. That being said, Article 62/63 is part of the main constitution that applies mainly with the candidates from the political parties campaigning in regards to the leadership through democratic process.

 

[ejaz007]

IK is now seaing a real possibility that some in his own party might fall to same article. The hard work of collecting so many lootas in the end might damage the party more than helping since these might be affected by the same article.

If its proven in court that IK has an illegitimate child then yes that can become a basis for his disqualification as well. But the problem here is how are you going to prove this in court? Currently it is only an accusation. You and one other member said that DNA test can be used to prove the biological relation, to which I asked how the DNA sample from the child can be collected who is not even a Pak citizen? And I still haven't got a reasonable answer ... I guess you also know thats not going to be possible.

Now you are coming up with an illogical argument of burden of proof on being IK, and that failure to get DNA test will mean that IK is actually the father ... to which I am telling you that is not how relationships are established between humans. Not being personal here, but as an example you cannot be considered an illigetimate child of your neighbor until there is a dna test to prove otherwise, and your refusal to provide a dna sample wouldn't mean the accused man/Neighbour will be considered guilty and as your biological father.

Regards

Los Angeles court decision is enough since IK refused to cooperate.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Clearly, you don't understand the concept of Article 62/63 which transcends the method of innocent until proven guilty. It is other way around focusing on the accused party to dispel the accusation with the evidence. That is what sealed the fate of Nawaz Sharif in the first place through Article 62/63.

I already explained in one of my previous posts how NS was disqualified; NS accepted in court that he is the Chairman in FZE, and is elgible for salary. Court said ok we consider this an asset, to which you have accepted ownership infront of us, and it was not declared in your nomination papers - hence you are not 'truthful'/'Sadiq' in declaring all your assets in your nomination forms and considered disqualified. I dont see the opposite of 'innocent until proven guilty' being used to disqualify NS here.

Not the argument, but the concept is unfathomable. Nonetheless, the concept does exist due to the courtesy of Article 62/63. All it takes one case to appeal against Imran Khan to dispel the accusation since it is matter of political leadership which does take Article 62/63 into the account. So yes, it is opposite of innocent until proven guilty. Surely that is not hard to understand, does it?

So in the fictional example I provided in my last post, your neighbor in such an accusation will be considered guilty? And using a similar petition Shahbaz Sharif can also be accused to be the father of Sita whites child, and when he is not able to provide a DNA test to prove his innocence he will also be disqualified ... as according to you burden of proof should be on Shahbaz Sharif now to prove he is not the actual father. If that is the case then my friend this is CHAOS!!!

IK is now seaing a real possibility that some in his own party might fall to same article. The hard work of collecting so many lootas in the end might damage the party more than helping since these might be affected by the same article.

And they really should fall for this article, the likes of Khar and Awan deserve it.

Los Angeles court decision is enough since IK refused to cooperate.

That could become a basis of petition against IK, but then I dont think this will matter in Paks court. Unless the child doesnt come to Pakistan and files a petition that IK is the biological father and demands a DNA test, I don't see any logical grounds for his disqualification in Pak courts.