Pakistan Supreme Court updates

[ghazi52]

,.,.

SC backs 'concept of deterrent punishment’​

Top court sets aside FSC decision on reinstatement of head postmaster after his acquittal from NAB proceedings

Hasnaat Maik
August 14, 2022

The Supreme Court has advocated the 'concept of deterrent punishment' in service matters.

It noted that sometimes a little negligence or inefficiency might cause a serious disaster and stern end results. “Therefore, at the time of appraising any act of misconduct contrasted with the penalty imposed by the management, the Service Tribunal is obligated to reevaluate the evidence all inclusive and then inquiry findings with recommendations,” read a nine-page judgment authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar while setting aside the Federal Service Tribunal’s (FSC) decision on the reinstatement of the head postmaster after his acquittal from National Accountabilty Bureau (NAB) proceedings.

“[The] foresight of deterrent punishment is not only to maintain balance with the seriousness of wrong done by a person but also to make an example for others as a preventive measure for reformation of the society,” the verdict added.

The SC observed that the respondent was found guilty in discharge of his duties, hence he could not be let free or exonerated.

A division bench of the apex court led by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the matter.
The judgment stated: “According to clause (b) of Section 2 of the RSO 2000, the definition of 'misconduct’ included conduct prejudicial to good order or service discipline or conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman or involvement or participation for gain either directly or indirectly in industry, trade or speculative transactions or abuse or misuse of the official position to gain undue advantage or assumption of financial or other obligations to private institutions or persons such that might cause embarrassment in the performance of official duties or functions.”

It added that Section 3 of the same ordinance was “germane” to the dismissal, removal and compulsory retirement of certain persons in government or corporation service whose powers could be exercised by the competent authority in the circumstances and state of affairs if the employee was found to be inefficient, guilty of being habitually absent from duty without prior approval of leave, or guilty of misconduct or corruption.

However, the court noted that before taking any drastic action, it was incumbent upon the competent authority to inform the accused in writing the grounds of the action and give them a reasonable opportunity of showing cause.
The court also noted that the articulation that misappropriation of huge amount of public money from saving accounts being not in the knowledge of the respondent was nothing but a “figment of imagination and also beyond reasonable comprehension”.

"In contrast, it is a deceptive and dishonest plea in our sagacity, which in fact aggravates the degree of negligence, inefficiency and incompetence and proves that the respondent was not capable or qualified to hold any responsible post as he failed to sense any act of embezzlement and misappropriation of public money in the post office under his command … [this] could not have happened had the respondent performed his duties diligently and kept a vigilant eye on the books of account with periodic exercise of reconciliation for prompt checking and reporting in case any mishap or misappropriation of public funds is detected in the accounts, the judgment read.

“Being the postmaster, he was responsible for overseeing all aspects of the post office including the management of staff and the services or products offered by the post office. The corruption of substantial sums of public money could not be taken so lightly and that is why the respondent was dismissed by the management, but the Service Tribunal without any just cause took the lenient view whereas the respondent did not deserve any compassion or sympathy,” it added.

The order stated that common sense or realism of criminal trial was to mete out punishment of the offences committed by the accused while departmental inquiry was started off for a probe into the allegations of misconduct in order to maintain and uphold discipline and decorum in the institution and efficiency of the department to strengthen and preserve public confidence.

The judgment also noted that a civil servant could not escape departmental proceedings or consequences thereof on account of his acquittal on a criminal charge.

"While facing expulsive proceedings on departmental side on account of his indictment on criminal charge, he may not save his job in the event of acquittal as the department may still have reasons to conscionably consider his stay in the service as inexpedient. The department can assess the suitability of a civil servant, confronted with a charge through a fact-finding method, which somewhat inquisitorial in nature, but without the heavier procedural riders otherwise required in criminal jurisdiction to eliminate any potential risk of error,” the verdict read.

 

[ghazi52]

,..,

SC ‘astonished’ at NAO amendment​

Asks how money deposited with NAB under plea bargain would be reimbursed to the accused

Hasnaat Malik
October 06, 2022

Supreme Court of Pakistan.

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has expressed wonder over the amendment in National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 which aims at undoing all plea bargains earlier entered into between the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the accused.


A three-judge special bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial expressed astonishment during the hearing of PTI Chairman and former premier Imran Khan’s petition on Wednesday against recent amendments in NAO.

This was the seventh hearing of the case wherein Imran’s counsel Khawaja Haris continued to advance his arguments in the case.

The PTI chief in his petition had claimed that the amendments to the NAB law were made to benefit the influential accused persons and legitimise corruption.

The applicant had also challenged the second amendment to the law done by the government in which offences involving misappropriation of less than Rs500 million were taken out of the purview of the law.

During the hearing, the bench wondered as to how the amount deposited with the NAB would be reimbursed to the accused after the admission of guilt and entering a plea bargain.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan, a member of the bench, observed that the Supreme Court found that parliament’s supremacy was not unbridled but was subject to the Constitution, adding that accountability was one of the main principles in Islam and “if you take it out then you are discharging trust”.

PTI senior leaders Chaudhry Fawad Hussain, Senator Azam Swati and Maleeka Bukhari were present in the courtroom. The lawmakers prepared notes for media talk as they did during the hearing of Panamagate proceedings in the apex court.

It has been witnessed that since the Panama case, PTI's media policy is linked with the legal strategy and that the party had been successful to get favourable results.

During the hearing, counsel Haris focused on the amendment related to plea bargain while referring to the amendment in section 25b of NAO 1999.

Amendment in section 25b of NAO 1999 states that where an accused challenges the validity of order approving plea bargain or it comes to the knowledge of the court otherwise that the plea bargain was a result of duress, coercion or any other illegal pressure exerted on the accused during the course of inquiry or investigation, the court after hearing both the parties may recall the approval of plea bargain to the extent of that accused.

The counsel submitted that the amendment aimed at undoing all the plea bargains earlier entered into between the NAB and the accused, notwithstanding that such plea bargains were entered into after obtaining approval of court, and such approval was granted after hearing all the parties concerned.
“Thus the amendment is just a ruse to undo already concluded plea bargains, irrespective of whether these have been fully acted upon or not.”
The counsel further argued that the objective of the amendment appeared to undo the statements of all such accused who, after entering into plea bargain, had further become witnesses against the principal accused, and their testimony as such could be used against the principal accused.

“In some cases it may be designed to undo is also directed towards undoing all such plea bargains with a view to get such plea bargaining accused exonerated of the charges against them and to provide them an opportunity and facilitate them to claim back even that money which they had earlier deposited with NAB as a condition precedent for their release; and evidently this will lead to causing loss to the national exchequer as such money is meant to be and would have since been deposited with the appropriate government.”

CJP Bandial noted that this way the state would have to pay billions of rupees to the accused.
Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, another member of the bench, however, asked if taking money from the accused under pressure was correct.

He again asked the counsel why the petitioner (Imran Khan) did not raise the objections on these amendments in parliament. He wondered how the PTI chairman could walk out of the parliament without the wish of his constituency, wherein he was elected as MNA.
Justice Shah again said that the former premier could have raised these objections on amendments in the parliament.

Justice Ahsan while endorsing the petitioner concerns wondered whether those who had entered the plea bargain in the scams of below Rs500 million would approach the court for recovery as their cases did not fall in the NAB jurisdiction after new amendments.

The bench also noted that the recent amendments had decriminalise certain offences.

Counsel Haris said that concessions to the accused through these amendments were violative of Article 9 of the Constitution.

The CJP asked which concessions would be violative of the fundamental rights.

The hearing of case is adjourned till Thursday (today).

A government member revealed that concerns regarding these amendments were based on speculations as government attorney Makhdoom Ali Khan would strongly defend these amendments.

Meanwhile, the NAB submitted a written statement with the Supreme Court saying it would adopt submissions made by and on behalf of the federal government except any adverse statements and arguments advanced against it (NAB) in writing or oral.
The statement was submitted by Acting Additional Prosecutor General Chaudhry Mumtaz Yousuf.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial has been urged to immediately call the meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to fill the vacancies of the five judges in the Supreme Court.

Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, who are members of the JCP, have written a letter to the CJP Bandial, who is also the Chairman of the Commission regarding the matter, and forwarded it to the other members of the JCP.

In the letter they stated; “In order to actualize the constitutional obligation under Article 175A(8) of the Constitution meetings of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) should automatically be scheduled at the earliest on the occurrence of any vacancy in the Supreme Court.

JCP is not the Supreme Court, but an independent constitutional body, that must have a separate and independent functional secretariat, headed by a professional secretary. This is essential to honour the constitutional obligation and to keep the constitutional courts fully functional in order to ensure speedy dispensation of justice across the country and to protect the right to access to justice of the people of Pakistan.

“Responsibility of the timely filling of the vacancies to a constitutional court falls primarily on the shoulders of every member of the JCP.

Any inordinate delay in the performance of this function, except for an unavoidable cause, which is not there in the present case, is both unfortunate and undesirable. Supreme Court has five vacancies that have piled up since February 2022 over a period of almost nine months. We as members of the JCP have time and again requested you to hold a meeting of the JCP to fill these vacancies.

“Our meetings with you in this regard have ended in vain. One of our senior colleagues and the member of the JCP Justice Qazi Faez Isa has already written to you in this regard on September 2022. It is important to underline that delay in filling the vacancy gives rise to unwanted rumours of petty politics, lobbying and quid pro quo appointments, which not only undermines the institutions but also seriously impairs the neutrality and the transparency of the appointment process.

‘Convene JC meeting to fill judges’ vacancies’, Justice Isa writes to CJP

“We have taken oath under the constitution to ‘preserve, protect and defend the constitution.”

“We are sure, your honour is aware of the legal position enunciated by the Supreme Court in Al-Jihad Trust case that permanent vacancies occurring in the offices of the judges, normally should be filled immediately (but) not later than 30 days,” from the date of occurrence of the vacancies, and that it is a “constitutional obligation” of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan “to ensure that the constitutional offices do not remain vacant and the vacancies are filled in without any delay.”

They wrote that the inordinate delay of almost nine months in this case must be urgently addressed first, in order to swiftly move forward to fill the current vacancies, we had proposed to you in our meetings to either (i) consider the five chief justice of the five High Courts and against the five vacant posts or (ii) consider the top two judges from every High Court and open these options to vote in the next meeting of the JCP. This is the best way forward in the current circumstances, till such time that a more sophisticated selection criteria and constitution compliant Rules are framed.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

 

[ghazi52]

,.,.,.,

President Alvi approves elevation of three judges to Supreme Court​

Naveed Siddiqui
November 9, 2022

This combination photo shows Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah (left), Justice Shahid Waheed of the Lahore High Court (middle) and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi of the Sindh High Court (right). — Photo courtesy: LHC/IHC/SHC websites

President Dr Arif Alvi on Wednesday approved the elevation of three high court judges to the Supreme Court (SC).

Under Article 175A of the Constitution, he approved outgoing Islamabad High Court (IHC) chief justice Athar Minallah, Sindh High Court Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Lahore High Court Justice Shahid Waheed to the apex court, a statement issued by the President’s Secretariat said.

President Alvi also approved Justice Aamer Farooq’s appointment as the IHC chief justice.

On Monday, the Parliamentary Committee on the Appointment of Judges had approved the elevation of Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi to the Supreme Court.
The eight-member panel, headed by Senator Farooq H. Naek, had examined the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) recommendations for elevating the two judges.

The committee had on November 4 approved the JCP’s recommendations for the promotion of Justice Minallah to the SC and Justice Farooq as the IHC chief justice, respectively. However, it had deferred the consideration of the names of Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi for its meeting slated for Nov 10.

Earlier on Nov 2, the committee had decided to consider the names on Nov 10. However, it gave the nod for the elevation of Justice Minallah on Nov 4 at an unscheduled meeting and cleared Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi on Monday at yet another unscheduled meeting.

On Oct 24, the JCP after a prolonged meeting of three-and-a-half hours had unanimously approved the promotion of Justice Minallah. It gave a divided nod to Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi — both fourth on the seniority list of their respective courts — with a majority of five to four votes, but dropped outright the suggestion about the SHC’s Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui.

https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sha...awn.com/news/1719948&display=popup&ref=plugin

 

[ghazi52]

,..,,.

SC bars public office holders from using their photographs on govt documents, projects​

Apex court notes action violates Constitution, undermines Pakistan’s Islamic moorings

Hasnaat Malik
November 23, 2022


The Supreme Court (SC) has barred public office holders, including politicians, from affixing their photographs on public and government documents terming it a violation of their oath.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa authored a five-page judgment while questioning affixing the photograph of then Chief Minister Chaudhary Pervez Elahi on the certificates of properties situated in a Rawalpindi katchi abadi.

According to the order, affixing one’s own photograph on a public/government document projects personal interest, therefore, this is not permissible as it would violate one’s oath of office. It is also not permissible to manoeuvre or honour oneself through one’s subordinates, political associates, or in a manner that may call for reciprocal favours.

"Paid servants of the State, constitutional office holders and politicians in government must not use their positions for personal, partisan or pecuniary gain. If someone names a public/government place or property after themselves or affixes their own name or image on a public/government document, it is self-glorification, and if this is done by others, it would constitute obedience, flattery, nepotism and/or corruption," added the order.

A division bench of the apex court comprising Justice Isa and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah further noted that the apparent reason to portray the image of the chief minister, who is a politician, could only be to present him to the recipients of the certificates as their benefactor and thus cultivate in them a feeling of being beholden to him.

"If the said gentleman wanted to help the homeless, nothing prevented him from distributing his own property, and, if he did so, he would be at liberty to affix his photograph on the documents of title. Self-projection on public/government records and self-aggrandisement at public expense is not permissible," noted the court order.

The court also said that Pakistan is not a kingdom, principality, or fiefdom in which the people are to be beholden to their rulers.

"We must remain constantly vigilant in maintaining the country's independence and democratic credentials. Politicians and anyone else who renders public service are best immortalised for what they did or stood for after their passing, if for no other reason than that during their lifetime, some unsavoury truth may be revealed about them, and the people may no longer want to honour them," the court order added.

The judgment also said that to "name public/government properties and anything planned, developed and/or managed from public/government funds or to project oneself, as in the present case by getting one’s photograph affixed on the sanads (certificates), violates the Constitution, undermines Pakistan’s Islamic moorings, is without lawful authority, and, if one may add, is also in bad taste".

The court further directed its office to send copies of this order to the cabinet secretary, to all the chief secretaries of the provinces, and to the chief commissioner administrator of Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) to issue requisite notifications reminding government servants that they serve the people, and not individuals in government and that they must strictly abide by paragraphs 9 to 13 of this judgement.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.
The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday revoked former PTI leader Faisal Vawda’s lifetime disqualification as a lawmaker after he accepted misstating his dual nationality and apologised.

However, Vawda remains disqualified under Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution, under which a legislator loses membership of parliament for one term only.

Article 63(1)(c) says that a person will be disqualified from being elected or chosen member of parliament if he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan or acquires the citizenship of a foreign state.

Vawda will remain disqualified till 2023 and is eligible to contest the next general or Senate elections, the court order said.

The verdict was issued by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and consisting of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ayesha A. Malik.

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had disqualified Vawda in February for concealing his US citizenship and directed him to return the salary and other benefits he had received as a minister and as a member of the National Assembly within two months. It had also de-notified him as a senator.

Subsequently, Vawda had contested his lifetime disqualification in the apex court on grounds that the ECP did not have the jurisdiction to disqualify him as a member of parliament.

At the last hearing, the three-member bench headed by the CJP had summoned Vawda to give him a chance to express his regret for misstating his dual nationality before the top court.

“We can call the gentleman to express regrets that he misstated before the court by presenting an affidavit to claim that his sole nationality is Pakistani,” the CJP had said, adding, “If the petitioner acknowledges his mistake, we will leave it to the electorate to decide his fate.”

In the order issued today, the SC bench observed that Vawda stated before the court that he “regrets” the claim of renunciation of US nationality in his nomination papers for elections in Karachi’s NA-249 constituency on June 7, 2018.

“He states he had already applied for such renunciation before the date of filing the nomination [papers]. His certificate for the loss of US nationality was issued to him on June 25, 2018,” the court order read, adding that as a result of the difference of dates, he was disqualified from contesting elections under Article 63(1)(c).

Consequently, an “erroneous statement” was made in the affidavit he submitted regarding his dual nationality to the returning officer, the court observed.

The matter was also addressed during the hearing when Justice Shah asked Vawda about the dates of the issuance of the renunciation certificate and his resignation from the National Assembly (NA).

Vawda told the court that the certificate was issued on June 25, 2018 while he vacated his NA seat on March 30, 2021.

“You remained a member of the NA for three years,” the CJP then said, adding that the court’s did not intend to summon and embarrass him “but you misled everyone for three years”.

The CJP directed him to apologise before the court and say that he was resigning as a senator.

“If you apologise and resign with good intent, the disqualification will be for five years. Otherwise, proceedings under Article 62(1)(f) will be carried out,” the CJP told Vawda.

According to Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) “unless — he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law”.

Following the CJP’s remarks, Vawda stated before the court that he was tendering an “unconditional apology”. He said he did not intend to give a false statement and would accept the court’s decision.

Subsequently, the court observed in its order that “he (Vawda) regrets and accepts that he stands disqualified from the term of the assembly until 2023,” the court order said.

The order said although Vawda was elected as a senator in 2021, in order to demonstrate good faith, he was resigning from the Senate seat until the period of his disqualification expired.

“In view of the said statement, the petitioner has submitted his signed apology.”

The court directed Vawda to submit his resignation to the Senate chairperson and concluded that he was qualified to contest the next general or Senate elections.

‘Legal error’​

Speaking to the media after the hearing, Vawda maintained that he had committed a “legal error”.

“I committed a mistake legally. The court, too, has used the word error. It means it was a legal error,” he said. “I have been served justice, and I will resign [from the Senate] gracefully”,

Vawda also claimed that the CJP and his bench had said in their remarks that he had “shown character, grace, and inspiring confidence.

“This, coming from the Supreme Court’s highest panel, is an achievement for me in life.”

He went on to say that the SC had declared the ECP’s and Islamabad High Court’s orders regarding his disqualification “null and void”.

In response to a question, he said he had a relationship of “love and respect” with PTI chief Imran Khan and his association with him would continue.

He also denied that he was joining any party in the near future. “I am not joining any party for now. My politics may end here or it may go further. But I have this clarity that I am not joining any party.”

Dual nationality​

The News reported in January 2020 that Vawda was a dual national at the time of filing his nomination papers to the ECP to contest the 2018 general elections. Vawda submitted his nomination papers on June 11, 2018, which were approved by the election body a week later on June 18, the report said. However, the PTI MNA applied for the renunciation of his nationality with the US consulate at Karachi four days after the fact on June 22, 2018, the report revealed.

Qadir Khan Mandokhel, Mian Faisal and Mian Asif Mehmood subsequently filed petitions in the ECP on January 21, 2020, seeking Vawda’s disqualification. A citizen, Dost Ali, also filed a similar petition in 2020 challenging Vawda’s election as a member of the National Assembly. The petition stated that when Vawda filed his nomination papers for contesting elections, he held dual nationality as he was a US citizen as well.

A petition was also submitted to the Islamabad High Court seeking Vawda’s disqualification. The court had directed the PTI leader to submit a reply.

Despite the issuance of several notices, he did not respond to the petition. In March 2021, Vawda resigned as an MNA after being elected as a senator and his lawyer contended that a dual nationality case against the lawmaker was “not valid now”.

However, the IHC held him responsible for submitting a false affidavit regarding his nationality and directed the ECP to proceed against him under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution which deals with disqualification.

In November 2021, the senator filed a petition with the IHC seeking to stay proceedings of the ECP in his disqualification case but the court rejected the appeal.

Vawda’s counsel, Barrister Moeed, had then submitted the senator’s birth certificate to the ECP, stating that his client was born in California and was a US citizen by birth.

In February, the ECP disqualified PTI Senator Faisal Vawda as a lawmaker over the concealment of his dual nationality.

Vawda then moved the SC against his lifetime disqualification.

In his petition, he pleaded that it had been held by the apex court in the 2021 Allah Dino Bhayo case that the ECP was not a court of law within the context of Article 62(1)(f).

Moreover, this year, in the Muhammad Sulman case, the apex court held that the commission had no jurisdiction either under Article 218(3) of the Constitution or Section 9(1) of the Elections Act 2017 to deal with the qualification or disqualification of a returned candidate, the petition said.

Thus, the Feb 9 disqualification order of the ECP clearly negated the assumption of jurisdiction by the commission to disqualify Vawda for life, the petition contended.

 

[ghazi52]

,..,.,
Lawyers protested in front of the Supreme Court today and tried to wake up the justice from its deep sleep, but Zameen Janbad na Janbad Gul Muhammad.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1596153123902394368

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,,.
Editorial

International law and Pakistani attornies​

The Frontier Post

The Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial urged the government to keep international laws in mind while taking any decision, otherwise, the company will go to the international arbitration forum. The honorable Chief Justice observed these remarks during the hearing of the presidential reference regarding the revision of the mining contract on the Reko Diq project. According to the Chief Justice, there is a vast difference between the judicial system of Pakistan and the world, while improving the justice system was a big challenge for the judiciary. The Chief Adjudicator urged foreign investors to trust the justice system of Pakistan.

The famous Reko Deq gold mining case has attracted worldwide publicity, and public criticism due to imaginary tales of corruption, minerals confiscation as well as untrue human and property rights of Baloch people during the past decade. Political rivalry brought the issue to the Supreme Court amid intensified judicial activism. During the multiple hearing, neither government lawyers nor the company’s counsel appraised the court about binding clauses that might have legal and monetary consequences for the government at the international level. A three-member bench of the honorable Supreme Court canceled the Balochistan government contract with the foreign firm while declaring it contrary to public law. Later, the victim Tethyan company went to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) for financial compensation, which slapped Pakistan will a penalty of $ 5. 84 billion.

Presently, the Pakistani judiciary has struck a unique situation as its previous decision has exposed the country to an irreparable monetary loss. At the same time, its newest verdict can undo the mistakes of its predecessors, which clesrly exposes the weakness and fragility of our judicial system. Apparently, our judiciary solely depends on legal counsels while it does not have any system of cross-examination, or analytical research, therefore, a system that peers through others’ optics could not serve a speedy and impartial justice. Over the past seven decades, Pakistan’s judicial system is in the process of revolution and improvement, and still, our counsels and adjudicators are beginners in this field and the nation is paying a heavy price for their incompetence and over patriotism. Hence, how much time it would take to be fully groomed?

 

[Signalian]

@Mentee

Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) in its National Corruption Perception Survey (NCPS) 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt, judiciary 3rd most corrupt while education has climbed to 4th most corrupt since last NCPS 2021.

Police, judiciary among top three most corrupt institutions: survey

ISLAMABAD: Transparency International Pakistan in its National Corruption Perception Survey 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,...

www.thenews.com.pk

 

[Mentee]

@Mentee

Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) in its National Corruption Perception Survey (NCPS) 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt, judiciary 3rd most corrupt while education has climbed to 4th most corrupt since last NCPS 2021.

Police, judiciary among top three most corrupt institutions: survey

ISLAMABAD: Transparency International Pakistan in its National Corruption Perception Survey 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,...

www.thenews.com.pk

Police is always politicised and is battered into submission by the powers to be e.g a bunch of kaptaan sb's abducting i.g sindh in the dead of the night which is a very recent ocurence . Then there are sector commanders going s.h.o over s.h.o's . Mind you these reports are made based on stats provided by the civil institutions--------- kuch idaaray to files daikhaana to darkinaar office k pass b pharknay nae dyty

As for the judiciary well just leave it for another session.

 

[Signalian]

Police is always politicised and is battered into submission by the powers to be e.g a bunch of kaptaan sb's abducting i.g sindh in the dead of the night which is a very recent ocurence . Then there are sector commanders going s.h.o over s.h.o's . Mind you these reports are made based on stats provided by the civil institutions--------- kuch idaaray to files daikhaana to darkinaar office k pass b pharknay nae dyty

As for the judiciary well just leave it for another session.

You satisfied with the legal system provided to public in Pakistan ?

 

[ghazi52]

The law of Pakistan is inna lilla wana illiya rajiyun.
The courts of Pakistan are in a dead state.
Their decisions are being made on the call of the facilitators.

 

[Mentee]

You satisfied with the legal system provided to public in Pakistan ?

Plz be specific as to what division of judicial system you are inquiring about? If it's narco related cases then nothing exceptional could be achieved except police throwing street level junkies into jail by over exaggerating their role and amount of drugs seized as you pretty well know who's been heading the d.g anf since past many decades .

 

[Signalian]

Plz be specific as to what division of judicial system you are inquiring about? If it's narco related cases then nothing exceptional could be achieved except police throwing street level junkies into jail by over exaggerating their role and amount of drugs seized as you pretty well know who's been heading the d.g anf since past many decades .

Family courts

 

[Mentee]

,..,.,
Lawyers protested in front of the Supreme Court today and tried to wake up the justice from its deep sleep, but Zameen Janbad na Janbad Gul Muhammad.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1596153123902394368

Lawyers in punjab are going in full strike mode because of a brown uncle town of a Mr. justice ridiculing a junior lawyer over him not wearing a gown and then initiating contempt proceedings against a senior lawyer who offered that junior his own gown .


Mr justice seems to be aping the colonial traditions mindlessly . They've got all the technicality nonsense without any substance.