Musharraf episode turns dity; Lawyers barred from meeting

[SamantK]

At least nonpartisan judges can be placed in. The rest is immaterial unless you are trying him for it.

They can be but if you are expecting a lightening change, you know how things work!

 

[Safriz]

And you call yourself a senior member here on PDF???

comment on the topic mate...try not to shoot clay pigeons...
if you know about the law and have a better comment than mine then write it.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

The process is fine. Out of process is not. They were not denied bail. Their offence was not increased to deny bail. They were not denied legal counsel.



There are still judges who were not affected by Musharraf's actions. New judges must have come into the fold in the past 5 years. A proper bench should be created to hear his case.

....................

The way to select judges to hear a particular case is defined. Gen Muisharraf's lawyers made requests to change the bench and to be heard by a full bench. However, the authority of the courts to decide the bench is their right. Claiming bias by judges is not enough, but has to be proven in the court by lawyer's arguments.

You are correct that the present process is imperfect, just as it was imperfect a few short months ago. However, it was allowed then, and it should be allowed now.

 

[Awesome]

The way to select judges to hear a particular case is defined. Gen Muisharraf's lawyers made requests to change the bench and to be heard by a full bench. However, the authority of the courts to decide the bench is their right. Claiming bias by judges is not enough, but has to be proven in the court by lawyer's arguments.

Proven to whom? Same judge or the bigger judge who they are saying is also biased.

Even if the lawyer somehow depicts the judge's "dil ka haal" and he refuses to accept it, then what? Since people like to mix Musharraf's other issues, I'd mix one here related to how a judge can refuse irrefutable evidence too... A few days back DNA evidence off a gang raped victim was refused because there are no 4 witnesses. Aurat ke ooper semen hai, jokeh proven hai ke alleged rapists ka hai... aur shair ke bachay main himmat thi, dil jigra tha to ask "chaar gawah hain?"

Taking Jalib's Main nahi manta, to a whole new level

You are correct that the present process is imperfect, just as it was imperfect a few short months ago. However, it was allowed then, and it should be allowed now.

Processes are always like this. They are intentionally left loose for the judgement of the court. It is assumed that they would met out justice fairly. It is the same everywhere. However this level of jugga shahi is not done. Everyone who is directly affected and can be biased would rescues themselves from such cases. But over here "Main dasna aan".

I'm not ready to blame the entire judiciary - I'm blaming the bits that I've seen wrong. It is up to judiciary if they want to ruin their name like this or not.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Proven to whom? Same judge or the bigger judge who they are saying is also biased.

Even if the lawyer somehow depicts the judge's "dil ka haal" and he refuses to accept it, then what? Since people like to mix Musharraf's other issues, I'd mix one here related to how a judge can refuse irrefutable evidence too... A few days back DNA evidence off a gang raped victim was refused because there are no 4 witnesses. Aurat ke ooper semen hai, jokeh proven hai ke alleged rapists ka hai... aur shair ke bachay main himmat thi, dil jigra tha to ask "chaar gawah hain?"

Taking Jalib's Main nahi manta, to a whole new level



Processes are always like this. They are intentionally left loose for the judgement of the court. It is assumed that they would met out justice fairly. It is the same everywhere. However this level of jugga shahi is not done. Everyone who is directly affected and can be biased would rescues themselves from such cases. But over here "Main dasna aan".

I'm not ready to blame the entire judiciary - I'm blaming the bits that I've seen wrong. It is up to judiciary if they want to ruin their name like this or not.

You make good points, but in the end, we have to wait for the judiciary to decide how it wants to proceed with the cases against Gen Musharraf. As sub judice cases, there is a line of instigation or critcism of the courts that should not be crossed.

 

[Awesome]

You make good points, but in the end, we have to wait for the judiciary to decide how it wants to proceed with the cases against Gen Musharraf. As sub judice cases, there is a line of instigation or critcism of the courts that should not be crossed.

The honor of the courts should always be maintained. Criticism is a different thing. You can disagree with what they say but you have to follow what they decide.

Din ko raat kehdein, raat ko din. You have to accept it, but not necessarily agree with it.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

The honor of the courts should always be maintained. Criticism is a different thing. You can disagree with what they say but you have to follow what they decide.

Din ko raat kehdein, raat ko din. You have to accept it, but not necessarily agree with it.

Wise words Sir. In this case against Gen Musharraf, you and I can disagree all we want, but we will have to follow what they decide and accept it, also.

 

[batmannow]

Wise words Sir. In this case against Gen Musharraf, you and I can disagree all we want, but we will have to follow what they decide and accept it, also.

May U, He Or Anyone Else Go Agree Or Nt Agree, But pakarmy Hve To Agree On That, Cause If Nt It Will Spark Some Thing Beyond Retiring Kiyani,s Reach Too, thn Dont cry A Uprooted, Bad Working,massivly Croupt Damocrazy & Judiciary Under A Heavy Boot? With Peoples On Streets Once Again Dancing On The Streets Chanting Wellcome Pakarmy wellcome, For Unexpected Time to Go?

 

[BATMAN]

The honor of the courts should always be maintained. Criticism is a different thing. You can disagree with what they say but you have to follow what they decide.

Din ko raat kehdein, raat ko din. You have to accept it, but not necessarily agree with it.

How to accept and disagree at same time?

Judges are corrupt.

 

[Sedqal]

The process is fine. Out of process is not. They were not denied bail. Their offence was not increased to deny bail. They were not denied legal counsel.



There are still judges who were not affected by Musharraf's actions. New judges must have come into the fold in the past 5 years. A proper bench should be created to hear his case.



You need to decide are you punishing Musharraf for the law or to make example?

If its to make an example, then shoot him now, GHQ will fall on their knees. But thne don't say you are following the law. Accept you are unlawful. If it is to follow the law, then accept the inconsistencies of pursuing a lawful approach in all this.

PS you lost your credibility by posting NS's picture...

Oh come on that was used as a meme in humor. I am against all dictators starting from Ayub its not due to NS.

 

[Awesome]

How to accept and disagree at same time?

Judges are corrupt.

The right to free speech is there. You can disagree provided you do with civility. But you have to carry out their orders.

 

[Sedqal]

May U, He Or Anyone Else Go Agree Or Nt Agree, But pakarmy Hve To Agree On That, Cause If Nt It Will Spark Some Thing Beyond Retiring Kiyani,s Reach Too, thn Dont cry A Uprooted, Bad Working,massivly Croupt Damocrazy & Judiciary Under A Heavy Boot? With Peoples On Streets Once Again Dancing On The Streets Chanting Wellcome Pakarmy wellcome, For Unexpected Time to Go?

You have been claiming a revolution before Musharraf came to PK, before TuQ circus. Days of Martial law are gone, Musharraf is done. Welcome to Naya Pakistan. Please take solace in the fact that PMLN will most probably win and form the next Government

 

[Awesome]

Wise words Sir. In this case against Gen Musharraf, you and I can disagree all we want, but we will have to follow what they decide and accept it, also.

Well they are humans too... If you see something wrong happening, shor macha toh sakte hain, someone (with lawful authority) can then intervene and mitigate the situation.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Well they are humans too... If you see something wrong happening, shor macha toh sakte hain, someone (with lawful authority) can then intervene and mitigate the situation.

BREAKING NEWS:

Caretakers refuse to try Musharraf for treason | Pakistan | DAWN.COM

Caretakers refuse to try Musharraf for treason
DAWN.COM and Abdul Shakoor Khan

ISLAMABAD: The caretaker government in a written response refused to initiate proceedings against Pervez Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution, saying it was not in its mandate to do so.

The interim government said it had a limited mandate, which was mainly to ensure the holding of a free and fair election.

The Supreme Court (SC) was hearing on Monday the treason case against the former military ruler.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja, of the apex court reconstituted last week is hearing the case.

The retired general is currently residing in his farmhouse at Chak Shehzad which was declared a sub-jail last week.

Prior to the hearing, the counsels representing Musharraf said that they weren’t allowed to meet their client, deterring them from receiving fresh instructions on the case, despite permission from the SC.

The Adiala Jail administration is managing the detention responsibilities of Musharraf at his residence.

Legal analysts believe that this case will prevent aspiring military dictators to overthrow democratic governments and suspend the Constitution. However, some politicians are cautioning that the trial may open a Pandora’s box.

Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, chief of Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q), made a statement on Sunday suggesting that the trial should not target any specific institution of the state.

Shujaat was an ally of the former president when he unlawfully ruled the country for nine years(1999-2008).