What's new

Justice Isa’s wife seeks PM Imran’s removal

We as a people are being used like mice are used for experiments. Their corruption have been proven in the courts and they are still holding rallies against IK. Who btw have been proven corruption free. Now comes the wife of some judge who have properties in London. And his husband still holds the office. Quite Ironic isn't it. Corrupts are talking about corruption and trying to undermine the country in whatever way they could find. Now she will start asking for Army Chief resignation. I mean seriously what is happening in Pakistan.
 
The constitution of Pakistan gives this right to demand equal, fair, inconsistent justice:

Chapter 1: Fundamental Rights

8 Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights to be void.

(1) Any law, or any custom or usage having the force of law, in so far as it is inconsistent with the rights conferred by this Chapter, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void.
(2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights so conferred and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of such contravention, be void.
(3) The provisions of this Article shall not apply to :-

(a) any law relating to members of the Armed Forces, or of the police or of such other forces as are charged with the maintenance of public order, for the purpose of ensuring the proper discharge of their duties or the maintenance of discipline among them; or
16[

(b) any of the:-

(i) laws specified in the First Schedule as in force immediately before the commencing day or as amended by any of the laws specified in that Schedule;
(ii) other laws specified in Part I of the First Schedule;
] 16 and no such law nor any provision thereof shall be void on the ground that such law or provision is inconsistent with, or repugnant to, any provision of this Chapter.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraph (b) of clause (3), within a period of two years from the commencing day, the appropriate Legislature shall bring the laws specified in 18[Part II of the First Schedule] 18into conformity with the rights conferred by this Chapter:

(5) The rights conferred by this Chapter shall not be suspended except as expressly provided by the Constitution.



25 Equality of citizens.

(1) All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law.

One law / criteria for Imran and another for someone else is not acceptable. Anyone can question this.

Bro seriously :D

The bitch is butt hurt and has not provided her own money trail. It's just desperate revenge attempts, faiz esa is rabid now a days, just a week or so ago he lodged a similar complain for disqualification of IK on some laughable grounds.
 
Bro seriously :D

The bitch is butt hurt and has not provided her own money trail. It's just desperate revenge attempts, faiz esa is rabid now a days, just a week or so ago he lodged a similar complain for disqualification of IK on some laughable grounds.

Demanding equal, fair and inconsistent justice is a laughable ground??
 
let her drag IK to court, if IK has nothing to hide this lady will get butthurt, anyone who has nothing to hide will never be afraid of going to any court, problem is that here in our nation everyone has skeletons hidden in the closet and no one is sadiq and ameen
 
Wife??... Who give a damn what she thinks or wants???... Who the f is she?

Every corrupt and looter is wishing that Imran Khan be removed. Yesterday Ishaq Daar (corrupt) said the same and got humiliated on BBC that what credibility they have to demand Imran Khan's removal.
 
Justice Isa’s wife seeks PM Imran’s removal


Sarina Isa says Imran Khan is judged by a different yardstick by the apex court


Hasnaat Malik
December 01, 2020

prime-minister-imran-khan-photo-file

Prime Minister Imran Khan.


ISLAMABAD: Sarina Isa, the wife of Justice Qazi Faez Isa, has prayed that the Supreme Court should remove Imran Khan from the office of the prime minister over the alleged non-disclosure of assets and tax cheat.

Mrs Isa, who has filed a review petition against the June 19 majority judgment, requiring verification by tax authorities of three properties in her and children’s name, on Tuesday submitted additional grounds in the apex court.

She submitted a long list of charges — (i) he is a tax cheat, (ii) did not disclose his three children’s assets when they were minors in his returns, (iii) illegally accessed and obtained the petitioner’s legally protected records maintained by the FBR, NADRA, FIA and SBP and more — to justify her plea for the disqualification of the prime minister.
She raised questions over the money trail provided by the prime minister regarding purchase of land at Bani Gala, noting he “is judged by a different yardstick by the apex court”.

She stated that the June 19 judgment “is contrary to the apex court’s judgment in Imran Khan’s disqualification case.
"Comparing Mr Imran Khan’s documents with the petitioner’s regarding their respective properties, there is a great difference, a chalk and cheese difference.

“The petitioner produced verifiable documents, including her own bank documents. Mr Imran Khan spun a tale: his divorced wife (Ms Jemima Goldsmith) sent him money to buy properties in Pakistan but did not send it into his bank account but through a convenient intermediary (Mr Rashid Khan),” she stated in her submission.

“Incidentally, Ms Jemima Goldsmith did not verify this. Mr. Imran Khan’s tall tale was accepted by this honourable court,” she stated.

The petitioner voluntarily presented herself before the court, she said and added supported her documents with real bank documents and real accounts without any friendly intermediaries.

“Mr Imran Khan offered no explanation of his considerable wealth, where he got the money to buy 300 kanals [of land] in Islamabad on which he constructed a mansion; where he got the money to buy the most expensive apartment in Islamabad or the money to buy his other properties unless he got it all from Ms Jemima Goldsmith and as such he is her dependent, but then he is a hypocrite to assume that the petitioner is her husband’s dependent," says Mrs Isa in her review petition.

She also said that Imran Khan is judged by a different yardstick and it is assumed that he can buy the most expensive properties in Islamabad having paid a pittance in income tax.

“The petitioner’s discrimination on account of her gender is very hurtful. Chauvinism and misogyny may be individual traits but cannot be permitted to subvert the Constitution and Islam.”

Sarina also wondered will a judge ever dare decide a case that may offend those sitting in the government now. "Will a judge’s family let him abide by the oath of his office to uphold the Constitution and law? Will a judge’s family beg not to upset those in the government? Will a judge and his family ever feel secure? Will a judge’s family not tell him to immediately resign rather than he and his family face malicious and vile propaganda?

“Must every judge and his family pay the price of judicial independence? Even if Mr Imran Khan’s government is unable to get rid of Justice Isa, a message has still been sent out to each and every judge in the country -- dare be independent, dare decide against us and see what we do to you, your wife and children," says the review petition.
Sarina alleged that Imran Khan submitted a false affidavit to obtain a plot measuring one kanal for himself in Lahore from former Punjab chief minister Nawaz Sharif in 1987.

“Mr Imran Khan also received a free one kanal plot in Islamabad and money from former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in 1992 on winning the Cricket World Cup.”

"Did it behove a financially well-off gentleman to take free plots and to deprive the poor, particularly when receiving plots was not backed by any law.”

In comparison the petitioner has never received a handout from the government, let alone by submitting a false affidavit, nor did she ever avail of a tax amnesty.

"The petitioner bought the three properties from her own earnings and savings. The petitioner, unlike Mr. Imran Khan, also did not conceal the three properties under a company’s name. The petitioner also unlike Imran Khan did not cheat on her taxes.

"The petitioner has not supressed her tax returns. On the contrary the petitioner lost her plot in the government’s Shah Abdul Latif Town Scheme Karachi for which she was not compensated, and needless to state her husband did not help her."
Sarina said that the June 19 order facilitates Imran Khan and his cronies to continue violating the petitioner’s fundamental rights.
"The petitioner’s right to privacy and dignity as a human (guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution) were violated. After passing of the order dated 19th June, the petitioner’s fundamental right to seek information (guaranteed by Article 19A of the Constitution), right to a fair trial and due process (guaranteed by Article 10A), to be treated equally (guaranteed by Article 25(1) of the Constitution) and not to be discriminated against on the basis of sex (guaranteed by Article 25(2) of the Constitution) were violated."

Sarina stated that former chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa’s wife, Ayesha Khosa, ran a boutique from a residential house in the name “Ayesha and Montaha” and Meher Azmat Saeed taught at the Lahore Grammar School, both were independent working ladies; they and their husbands personally knew the petitioner and her background, including her having worked for decades in the Karachi American School, and her family background.

Therefore, feigning ignorance about the petitioner’s work, background and independent financial status is incomprehensible."

It is also stated that the source of funds and money trail concepts were introduced by Chief Justice/Chairman Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) to save a failing reference whose maintainability Chief Justice Khosa had himself and later the SJC had questioned.

"They did not answer their own question of maintainability but introduced novel concepts and then latched on to their self-impositions. If they assumed that the petitioner’s properties were not her own then they should also have assumed the same about their wives, that Mrs Ayesha Khosa’s boutique business was that of Chief Justice Khosa and all of Meher Azmat Saeed earnings and properties were those of Justice Azmat Saeed, and apply their own invented tests of source of funds and money trail to them too."

"The petitioner is also perplexed why they and Mr Justice Gulzar Ahmed, then a member and now chairman of the SJC, who also personally knew the petitioner, never asked the petitioner who lived next door about her properties once.

The petitioner regrets mentioning the gentlemen and their wives but these gentlemen took it upon themselves to judge a spouse of a fellow judge by a self-invented concepts.

“Appalling double-standards must be put to rest by this Honourable Court."

Sarina requested the Supreme Court to remove Imran Khan from the office of the prime minister because

(i) he is a tax cheat,
(ii) did not disclose his three children’s assets when they were minors in his returns,
(iii) illegally accessed and obtained the petitioner’s legally protected records maintained by the FBR, NADRA, FIA and SBP;
(iv) illegally carried out the petitioner’s surveillance, (v) falsely claimed that the petitioner’s properties were those of her husband,
(vi) advised the president to file a bogus reference on the basis of a proxy complainant;
(vii) disclosed the designated secret and confidential reference to the media;
(viii) instructed his team to carry out a propaganda campaign against the petitioner and her family,
(ix) facilitated the setting of the illegal Assets Recovery Unit,
(x) appointed PTI’s party worker Mirza Shahzad Akbar as ARU’s chairman,
(xi) enabled ARU and its chairman to function without any law,
(xii) deputed Mirza Shahzad Akbar to undertake, on his own behalf, illegal activities by bypassing the relevant statutory institutions and government departments, including sending him to London to negotiate with a property tycoon a deal worth millions pounds;
(xiii) constantly and repeatedly disregarded the decision in the Anita Turab case, (xiv) appointed FBR’s chairpersons for personal and ulterior motives,
(xv) assumes statutory powers of FBR, FIA and NAB by exonerating the tax cheating and corrupt persons in his cabinet, his advisors and special assistants;
(xvi) has senior government officers kidnapped from Islamabad who act against the interest of his cronies;
(xvii) gets an IG of police picked up and humiliated for not doing his bidding;
(xviii) orders the surveillance of judges of the Supreme Court and their families,
(xix) commits contempt of the honourable Supreme Court by getting appointed a declared contemnor as a Special Assistant (this Honourable Court has previously ordered the removal of a Prime Minister when he committed contempt).





she needs to take a ticket and wait in line ...
 
Demanding equal, fair and inconsistent justice is a laughable ground??
It's not a defense.

You can't argue that 'because X individual committed Y alleged crime that I should also be allowed to commit Y crime'.

The two issues should be addressed separately - Issa and his wife should provide their money trail and all information required by the FBR and courts. This continuous deflection makes me suspect that there might actually be something to the allegations against Issa and his wife - they're acting like politicians.
 
Sarina appears in SC with plea against PM


Nasir Iqbal
02 Dec 2020




Sarina Isa, on Tuesday appeared before the Supreme Court with a plea seeking a court order for removal of Imran Khan from the office of prime minister for allegedly not disclosing his three children’s assets. — Photo courtesy Supreme Court website/File



Sarina Isa, on Tuesday appeared before the Supreme Court with a plea seeking a court order for removal of Imran Khan from the office of prime minister for allegedly not disclosing his three children’s assets. — Photo courtesy Supreme Court website/File




ISLAMABAD: Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s wife, Sarina Isa, on Tuesday appeared before the Supreme Court with a plea seeking a court order for removal of Imran Khan from the office of prime minister for allegedly not disclosing his three children’s assets when they were minors in his income tax returns.

She also pleaded the court to accept her earlier review petition, urging the court to set aside the June 19 short order as well as the Oct 23 detailed reasons by seven judges in the Justice Isa case.

On Nov 10, Ms Isa appeared in the court to submit an application before the Supreme Court’s registrar with a request to include all judges in the 10-member full court who had earlier decided her husband’s petition against filing of the presidential reference and issued a short order on June 19.


Now in the fresh application, she reiterated that she be heard by all the judges who heard the cases in her absence and heard first because she has never been heard and after hearing her the Supreme Court allow her prayers and recall/set aside the short order and the detailed reasons of the majority judgement.

She pleaded the court to declare all proceedings conducted by Inland Commissioner of Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) Zulfiqar Ahmad against her in the three London properties matter to be void and strike down his Sept 14, 2020 notification.

She sought the court’s order for removing PM Khan from his office for allegedly not disclosing his three children’s assets when they were minors in his Income Tax returns. She also accused PM Khan of illegally accessing and obtaining her legally protected records maintained by the FBR, Nadra, the Federal Investigation Agency and the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) besides allegedly ordering her surveillance.


She accused the prime minister of falsely claiming that her London properties belonged to her husband and advising the president to file a ‘bogus’ reference on the basis of a proxy complainant and then disclosing the designated secret and confidential reference to the media.

The prime minister, she alleged, also instructed his team to carry out a propaganda campaign against her and her family, set up “illegal” Assets Recovery Unit, appointed PTI’s party worker Mirza Shahzad Akbar as its chairman and enabled the ARU and its chairman to function without any law.


Published in Dawn, December 2nd, 2020
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom