Abasin Turi
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2009
- Messages
- 170
- Reaction score
- 0
it's not an issue of choosing any one but the real issue is when will we get up and vote ... cz we never vote and these bl**dy politicians win the elections again...!
Musharraf summoned in judges case
- Thread starter ejaz007
- Start date
it's not an issue of choosing any one but the real issue is when will we get up and vote ... cz we never vote and these bl**dy politicians win the elections again...!
fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
Editorial: Dice loaded against Musharraf
The Supreme Court on Wednesday summoned General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf to defend himself in a case brought to the court by the Sindh High Court Bar Association against the validity of his November 3, 2007 declaration of emergency and the issuing of the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) which effectively ousted 60 judges from the higher judiciary of the country.
When the Court asked around if anyone would defend General Musharraf, no one came forward. A summons was issued to Gen Musharraf at his residence in Chak Shahzad after the Court came to the conclusion that this could be done despite there being no precedent. (General Yahya Khan was not summoned in the Asma Jilani Case after his fall from power.) Will Gen Musharraf come to the Court and defend himself?
Since it is not a criminal case, he doesn’t need to be present in person. Should he get his lawyers to defend him? The news is that he is consulting. We believe that his lawyers should advise him to do so. The reasons are as follows. The Supreme Court is not a kangaroo court and a case unfolding in it will be heard by the entire nation, and if there are any mitigating factors in favour of Gen Musharraf they will be highlighted for all to note. Given the one-sidedness of the atmosphere in the country, this is necessary.
Everybody thinks that Gen Musharraf is indefensible. The atmosphere in the country is completely anti-Musharraf. Suddenly nothing that he ever did was right. Those who once defended his actions in the realm of foreign policy and inside a rapidly Talibanising country are silenced today by the sheer weight of the hatred that everyone feels for him. Good rational citizens have gone on record as saying that he should be awarded “exemplary punishment” although this is not a case asking that this be done.
If ancient Greek historian Herodotus — who sought hubris among the heroes of history as the cause of their fall — were to examine the role of Gen Musharraf in his eight years of rule, he would praise him for some things and lament his acts of hubris (“outrageous arrogance” in Greek) for bringing about his downfall. He would differentiate between the “tyrants” — in Greek, undemocratic rulers were called tyrants — of the past and Musharraf as the tyrant of today. He would soon discover that General Ayub Khan, General Yahya Khan and General Zia-ul Haq were let off because their regimes had been “indemnified” by later elected parliaments; Musharraf’s is not.
Musharraf had hubris that stood out a mile. He staged Kargil as army chief, stamping himself with rashness of judgement. After coming to power, he rashly planned the permanent ouster from the political arena of the PPP and the PMLN, the latter after splitting it. After this act of hubris, he ruled carefully till he reached a crisis of relationship with a PCO-ed chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan who had become “activist”. In the full light of the media, whom he had nurtured into an unprecedented dominance, General Musharraf was rejected by the nation.
The process of rejection of General Musharraf began in March 2007. It was accelerated by a media-supported lawyers’ movement that soon attracted civil society organisations to its ranks. After the 2008 elections, the forces that he had sought to defeat were in the ascendant and were baying for his blood. He had to leave the country because of threat of criminal cases against him. Now the Supreme Court which is listening to the case will have to show unprecedented neutrality and disregard the personal affront shown to it by him earlier. The government is unwilling to defend him fearing loss of public support. The media wants him not only defeated in the case but prosecuted for all sorts of crimes that he may have committed or not, including one of “enslaving” the country to America.
Important, if not pivotal, to the case, is the role of the Pakistan Army; and it should be acknowledged with praise. It stood aside from the vendettas of General Musharraf after he ceased to be army chief, persuaded the government to let Chief Justice Chaudhry be reinstated, and is today acting in breach of the army’s not-so-immaculate conduct in the past. Not even justice is benevolent if its rulings are immoderate. Unfortunately, far too many elements in the country seem to be seeking revenge in the guise of justice. But justice is deterrent; revenge never is.
http://www.thedailytimes.com.pk
The Supreme Court on Wednesday summoned General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf to defend himself in a case brought to the court by the Sindh High Court Bar Association against the validity of his November 3, 2007 declaration of emergency and the issuing of the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) which effectively ousted 60 judges from the higher judiciary of the country.
When the Court asked around if anyone would defend General Musharraf, no one came forward. A summons was issued to Gen Musharraf at his residence in Chak Shahzad after the Court came to the conclusion that this could be done despite there being no precedent. (General Yahya Khan was not summoned in the Asma Jilani Case after his fall from power.) Will Gen Musharraf come to the Court and defend himself?
Since it is not a criminal case, he doesn’t need to be present in person. Should he get his lawyers to defend him? The news is that he is consulting. We believe that his lawyers should advise him to do so. The reasons are as follows. The Supreme Court is not a kangaroo court and a case unfolding in it will be heard by the entire nation, and if there are any mitigating factors in favour of Gen Musharraf they will be highlighted for all to note. Given the one-sidedness of the atmosphere in the country, this is necessary.
Everybody thinks that Gen Musharraf is indefensible. The atmosphere in the country is completely anti-Musharraf. Suddenly nothing that he ever did was right. Those who once defended his actions in the realm of foreign policy and inside a rapidly Talibanising country are silenced today by the sheer weight of the hatred that everyone feels for him. Good rational citizens have gone on record as saying that he should be awarded “exemplary punishment” although this is not a case asking that this be done.
If ancient Greek historian Herodotus — who sought hubris among the heroes of history as the cause of their fall — were to examine the role of Gen Musharraf in his eight years of rule, he would praise him for some things and lament his acts of hubris (“outrageous arrogance” in Greek) for bringing about his downfall. He would differentiate between the “tyrants” — in Greek, undemocratic rulers were called tyrants — of the past and Musharraf as the tyrant of today. He would soon discover that General Ayub Khan, General Yahya Khan and General Zia-ul Haq were let off because their regimes had been “indemnified” by later elected parliaments; Musharraf’s is not.
Musharraf had hubris that stood out a mile. He staged Kargil as army chief, stamping himself with rashness of judgement. After coming to power, he rashly planned the permanent ouster from the political arena of the PPP and the PMLN, the latter after splitting it. After this act of hubris, he ruled carefully till he reached a crisis of relationship with a PCO-ed chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan who had become “activist”. In the full light of the media, whom he had nurtured into an unprecedented dominance, General Musharraf was rejected by the nation.
The process of rejection of General Musharraf began in March 2007. It was accelerated by a media-supported lawyers’ movement that soon attracted civil society organisations to its ranks. After the 2008 elections, the forces that he had sought to defeat were in the ascendant and were baying for his blood. He had to leave the country because of threat of criminal cases against him. Now the Supreme Court which is listening to the case will have to show unprecedented neutrality and disregard the personal affront shown to it by him earlier. The government is unwilling to defend him fearing loss of public support. The media wants him not only defeated in the case but prosecuted for all sorts of crimes that he may have committed or not, including one of “enslaving” the country to America.
Important, if not pivotal, to the case, is the role of the Pakistan Army; and it should be acknowledged with praise. It stood aside from the vendettas of General Musharraf after he ceased to be army chief, persuaded the government to let Chief Justice Chaudhry be reinstated, and is today acting in breach of the army’s not-so-immaculate conduct in the past. Not even justice is benevolent if its rulings are immoderate. Unfortunately, far too many elements in the country seem to be seeking revenge in the guise of justice. But justice is deterrent; revenge never is.
http://www.thedailytimes.com.pk
muse
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 13,006
- Reaction score
- 0
Let Nawaz and his CJ, the media radicals, have their day - God Willing, their day will be an opportunity for Musharraf and Pakistanis to lay out their case.
Yes, the dice are loaded against Musharraf, but they have also been loaded against Musharraf and Pakistan, in true Pakistani spirit, face to the wind, with all manner of criminals who now imagine themselves Pakistan's rulers sharpening their knives, let us see on whom those knives will come to rest.
Yes, the dice are loaded against Musharraf, but they have also been loaded against Musharraf and Pakistan, in true Pakistani spirit, face to the wind, with all manner of criminals who now imagine themselves Pakistan's rulers sharpening their knives, let us see on whom those knives will come to rest.
Abasin Turi
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2009
- Messages
- 170
- Reaction score
- 0
Nawaz is just taking his revenge... this is so ironic they dont discuss national issues but when it comes to mushraff he takes all his daggers out and points them at zardari to take some action... hypocrites..!
moha199
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Messages
- 1,703
- Reaction score
- 0
Check out this website it's really great and all the poems are goodPakistan First
Last edited:
Mushraf will be hanged by the will of God for what damage he have done to my mother land
Khalids
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2009
- Messages
- 340
- Reaction score
- 0
NS has said a couple of time publicly that he has nothing personal with Musharraf but he will chase him for any unlawful act done by him (throwing out an elected government etc), while, on the other hand, Musharraf is on record for saying NS his pakka dushman and he can never come to Pakistan until I am in power, so please think who is revengeful NS or Musharraf?
This case is proceeding in PSC, are you sure that all the 14 judges of the bench are dummies playing in NS hands? Can you prove it? Can you say the same thing in media? yes or no.
And, do you think that a government servant (an army chief) has the right to make a whole country his/her personal property for the whole nine years? Isn't it a national issue.
You give a lot of money to the people and let lawlessness prevail at the same time, what will you do first? To bring the law to the society or not? To make the constitution of our country worth following is a national issue, my dear!
XYON
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,719
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Only until after the likes of Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari have their fat and corrupt necks dangling on the altar for the irreparable damage they did to Pakistan!
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
Oh yeah Before Oct 1999, Pakistan was doing so good! We weren't a 3rd world nation at the brink of default.
ejaz007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 6,533
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Martial law imposed on Nov 3, admits Sher Afghan
Updated at: 0300 PST, Monday, July 27, 2009
ISLAMABAD: Former Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan Niazi said former President Pervez Musharraf imposed martial law on November 3.
Talking to Dr Shahid Masud in his Geo News program Merey Mutabiq on Sunday night, he admitted that marital law was imposed in the country on November 3 and the countrys constitution was suspended, resultantly.
He said no case could be filed against former President Pervez Musharraf under Constitution Article-6.
Reacting to the statement of Dr Sher Afghan, Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q) President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain said no martial law was imposed on November 3, adding the army courts are organized under martial law; but, nothing of the kind happened during post November 3 time.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Secretary Information Fozia Wahab said Benazir Bhutto declared November 3 measures as mini-martial law.
Wahab said she does not want to comment about November 3 measures, as it is the party that will take decision in this connection.
Martial law imposed on Nov 3, admits Sher Afghan - GEO.tv
Updated at: 0300 PST, Monday, July 27, 2009
ISLAMABAD: Former Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan Niazi said former President Pervez Musharraf imposed martial law on November 3.
Talking to Dr Shahid Masud in his Geo News program Merey Mutabiq on Sunday night, he admitted that marital law was imposed in the country on November 3 and the countrys constitution was suspended, resultantly.
He said no case could be filed against former President Pervez Musharraf under Constitution Article-6.
Reacting to the statement of Dr Sher Afghan, Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q) President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain said no martial law was imposed on November 3, adding the army courts are organized under martial law; but, nothing of the kind happened during post November 3 time.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Secretary Information Fozia Wahab said Benazir Bhutto declared November 3 measures as mini-martial law.
Wahab said she does not want to comment about November 3 measures, as it is the party that will take decision in this connection.
Martial law imposed on Nov 3, admits Sher Afghan - GEO.tv
Yesterday i was watching that program "meray mutabik", where sher afghan accepted that Musharaf implemented "Marshal Law". The thing came into my mind that "it is good to have intelligent enemy then stupid friend". So far i remember, musharaf implemented "emergency" as president.. which is been allowed by constitution. This wont effect Musharaf's case, but i am now sure media especially geo, will continue dragging this line in every arguments.
Rafael
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 5,363
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Yes, It has been allowed by the constitution but the president should have a valid reason for this and parliament has to validate that emergency. What reason Musharaff had at that time? Was Pakistan at war? Was their any natural calamity? Just because a decision of supreme court was about to come against him does not make it a "Valid" reason to impose emergency.
Further more, That emergency is not validated by the parliament to date.
Not even his best friends can justify that emergency aka mini marshal law of november 3rd.
ejaz007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 6,533
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
PML-N to go for treason case against Musharraf, if needed
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
By Tariq Butt
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) will exert pressure on the federal government to arraign Pervez Musharraf for high treason if it found a solid base for such a case in the impending judgment of the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of his Nov 3, 2007 subversion of the Constitution.
Regardless of the court decision we will exploit every opportunity and use every platform for Musharrafs trial under The High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973, PML-Ns chief spokesman Senator Pervez Rashid told The News.
The PML-N, he said, would not only request but also put pressure on the federal government to register a high treason case because under the existing law this power lies with it. We will mobilise all constitutional, legal, parliamentary and political forums to get Musharraf tried, Pervez Rashid said. We will not let him off the hook because if we did so the posterity will take our dead bodies out of graves and ask why didnt we perform our duty.
Other PML-N sources said that their party was anxiously waiting for the judgment of the 14-member bench of the apex court to know what observations and remarks it would pass against Musharraf regarding his Nov 3 promulgation of the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), state of emergency and suspension of the Constitution.
They said that the PML-N would devise its strategy in the light of this verdict, which was expected to be handed down on coming Friday as the court was likely to complete the hearing of different petitions by that time after giving a week time to Musharraf to appear before it in person or through a counsel to present his viewpoint on his Nov 3 action.
These sources said that if the court directed registration of a high treason case against Musharraf and his collaborators and abettors, the PML-N would become a party to the case. In the normal course, they said, courts have been ordering registration of criminal cases against different people when the state or police refuse to do so.
Former Senate chairman Barrister Wasim Sajjad told The News that The High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973 has never been invoked and the prescribed sentence never awarded since its introduction. He said this piece of legislation was framed in pursuance of Article 6 of the Constitution.
This provision, which has been widely talked about during all the tenures of the successive military dictators as well as after their exit, reads, any person who abrogates or attempts or conspires to abrogate, subverts or attempts or conspires to subvert the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason. Any person aiding or abetting these acts shall likewise be guilty of high treason. The high treason act provides death penalty or life imprisonment for those found guilty of this offence.
Wasim Sajjad elaborated that there was a clear difference between treason and high treason. Treason is an offence under the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) whereas a separate statute of law exists for high treason after the heinous offence has been provided in the Constitution. If someone works against the state, for example, by raising a private army, he commits treason but if he subverts the Constitution, he is guilty of high treason, he said.
PML-N to go for treason case against Musharraf, if needed
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
By Tariq Butt
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) will exert pressure on the federal government to arraign Pervez Musharraf for high treason if it found a solid base for such a case in the impending judgment of the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of his Nov 3, 2007 subversion of the Constitution.
Regardless of the court decision we will exploit every opportunity and use every platform for Musharrafs trial under The High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973, PML-Ns chief spokesman Senator Pervez Rashid told The News.
The PML-N, he said, would not only request but also put pressure on the federal government to register a high treason case because under the existing law this power lies with it. We will mobilise all constitutional, legal, parliamentary and political forums to get Musharraf tried, Pervez Rashid said. We will not let him off the hook because if we did so the posterity will take our dead bodies out of graves and ask why didnt we perform our duty.
Other PML-N sources said that their party was anxiously waiting for the judgment of the 14-member bench of the apex court to know what observations and remarks it would pass against Musharraf regarding his Nov 3 promulgation of the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), state of emergency and suspension of the Constitution.
They said that the PML-N would devise its strategy in the light of this verdict, which was expected to be handed down on coming Friday as the court was likely to complete the hearing of different petitions by that time after giving a week time to Musharraf to appear before it in person or through a counsel to present his viewpoint on his Nov 3 action.
These sources said that if the court directed registration of a high treason case against Musharraf and his collaborators and abettors, the PML-N would become a party to the case. In the normal course, they said, courts have been ordering registration of criminal cases against different people when the state or police refuse to do so.
Former Senate chairman Barrister Wasim Sajjad told The News that The High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973 has never been invoked and the prescribed sentence never awarded since its introduction. He said this piece of legislation was framed in pursuance of Article 6 of the Constitution.
This provision, which has been widely talked about during all the tenures of the successive military dictators as well as after their exit, reads, any person who abrogates or attempts or conspires to abrogate, subverts or attempts or conspires to subvert the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason. Any person aiding or abetting these acts shall likewise be guilty of high treason. The high treason act provides death penalty or life imprisonment for those found guilty of this offence.
Wasim Sajjad elaborated that there was a clear difference between treason and high treason. Treason is an offence under the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) whereas a separate statute of law exists for high treason after the heinous offence has been provided in the Constitution. If someone works against the state, for example, by raising a private army, he commits treason but if he subverts the Constitution, he is guilty of high treason, he said.
PML-N to go for treason case against Musharraf, if needed
