Pakistan's high court acquits Nawaz Sharif

[BATMAN]

What about Iftikhar ch. him self! he endorsed the same coup and took oath under the PCO.
It is no justice when you decide Musharraf made ordinances selectively, specially when you do not accept him as a legal President at all...
NRO... should be scraped by iftikhar ch. as he promised in his self restoration campaign.
In case of plane hijacking case, I doubt that all witnesses were retrialed before aquiting N.Sharif. It appears more like help me help your self case.
Sharif ran the campaign of restoration of Iftikhar and offered friendly opposition to Mr. Zardari! what does it tells us?
I have a feeling that if Sharif comes back to power, he will **** it up again while trying to manipulate the army or promoting officers out of the way.

 

[muse]

So, a replay - I hope you get what you think you want - but don't be too suprised if other institutions begin muttering out loud, "who will rid me of this..."

 

[blain2]

Please read the Jurisdiction, there is ample description of the circumstances favored the execution of authority given under section 6 of the Civil Aviation Ordinance 1960. Read from page 22 to 37.

Qsaark,

You are pushing it. If NS had the brains to do it right by the constitution then he would have called the CoAS into his office and asked him to resign. The same way he did with Jehangir Karamat.

Don't bring about minor clauses which are ill-suited for the point you are trying to make. Under the constitution, very many such "emergency" related clauses can be invoked to support the action of the Army all in the name of "tranquility" and "security" etc. etc.

The problem is that it was not only the flight of the CoAS which was diverted. There were 200 other citizens of Pakistan on-board who were recklessly put in harms way to protect ones own political career.

If you really feel that the weight of the constitution was on the side of the PM then why all this drama? Call the General in and fire him. Why allow the General to take advantage of these dubious circumstances that your man created himself?

 

[qsaark]

What about Iftikhar Ch. him self! he endorsed the same coup and took oath under the PCO. It is no justice when you decide Musharraf made ordinances selectively, specially when you do not accept him as a legal President at all...

Justice Choudhry was a shrewd guy. He took the oath under the PCO because he believed in “live today, fight tomorrow’. Could he have done what he did if he had taken the retirement like some of the other Justices? Basically Justice Choudhry out maneuvered General Musharraf.

NRO... should be scraped by Iftikhar Ch. as he promised in his self restoration campaign.

Someone has to take this infamous NRO to the court, only than he will be in a position to do something.

In case of plane hijacking case, I doubt that all witnesses were re-trialed before aquiting N.Sharif. It appears more like help me help your self case.

Did you read the Jurisdiction? Don’t doubt, know it by reading the relevant material and than comment.

Sharif ran the campaign of restoration of Iftikhar and offered friendly opposition to Mr. Zardari! what does it tells us?

That he does not want to repeat the same mistakes he made previously which eventually paved the way for the Military takeover.

I have a feeling that if Sharif comes back to power, he will **** it up again while trying to manipulate the army or promoting officers out of the way.

This is anybody’s Guess. Since I am not God Almighty, I can not say anything about it.

 

[qsaark]

Qsaark,

You are pushing it. If NS had the brains to do it right by the constitution then he would have called the CoAS into his office and asked him to resign. The same way he did with Jehangir Karamat.

Don't bring about minor clauses which are ill-suited for the point you are trying to make. Under the constitution, very many such "emergency" related clauses can be invoked to support the action of the Army all in the name of "tranquility" and "security" etc. etc.

The problem is that it was not only the flight of the CoAS which was diverted. There were 200 other citizens of Pakistan on-board who were recklessly put in harms way to protect ones own political career.

If you really feel that the weight of the constitution was on the side of the PM then why all this drama? Call the General in and fire him. Why allow the General to take advantage of these dubious circumstances that your man created himself?

Blain, answers are present in the detailed Jurisdiction for all the questions you have. PLEASE read the full Jurisdiction, and than discuss the issue. General Jahangir Karamat was not involved in Kargil-like misadventure and had nothing to fear about. On the other hand Musharraf and other two renegade Generals were playing a different game. Musharraf had even changed the command of the 111 Brigade with one of his loyal guy (whom he promoted to Maj. General soon after the successful coup) without bringing this into the notice of the PM. PM was aware from his own sources that Musharraf was planning to take over the Government in order to avoid a potential inquiry on Kargil misadventure. Hence it was not possible for the PM to call Musharraf into his office and ask for the resignation. Again, these details are present in the Jurisdiction, and please read it.

 

[blain2]

The former dictator and his supporters also argued that the former PM ordered the plane not to land thus endangering the lives of the passengers and the COAS on board. First of all there was no COAS on board; he was a dismissed/retired COAS, a civilian.

Really and was the entire Army aware of this change? The answer is clearly no. Had the case been handled even half-way properly (not that Jehangir Karamat's was done so, however the PM knew better how to go about it), the CoAS may have been a former CoAS. The defence ministry had not even issued the notification yet the PM went on the TV to put on a show of the change of command which legally had no meaning at that time.

Second, the orders were not to keep the airplane in the air until all the fuel is consumed and airplane hits the ground. In fact Mr. Amin ullah Choudhary, DG CAA, and an approver said that after informing the Prime Minster (through his ADC) that the plane was low on fuel, PM allowed the plane to land on the Karachi or Nawab Shah Airport but not to let any passenger disembark and plane must be refueled and send to any other destination (Page 20, 40).

What you say is not how things were at KHI. The runway was blocked and only opened once troops from V Corps arrived and cleared the blocks. The PM had not bothered to tell his cronies that beyond allowing the plane to land, he also has to tell his people that all those impediments on the runway also should be removed otherwise allowing and letting it happen are two different things.

In fact, the argument that the plane was low on fuel also does not hold water. It is established on the record that that both pilot Sarwat Hussain and his aircraft, were under the control of General retired Pervez Musharraf, under whose instructions the pilot was ignoring the direction of the ATC and was refusing to return and land at Karachi thus wasted valuable time and fuel (Page 32).

Yes because the CoAS and the people who were on-board did not want to leave Pakistan and go to India or the Gulf. The fact that the aircraft was destined to land at KHI and the passengers also wanted the same and the flying activity that took place as a result obviously resulted in very little fuel being left, however how does that let NS off the hook? Why was the CoAS even allowed to board the aircraft in SL if the PM wanted to the fire his CoAS? Why endanger the lives of 200 other people when you know that some trouble would be brewing if you fired the CoAS while he was on an official trip outside of Pakistan? Why not do it when he was in Pakistan just like his predecessor was canned?

The Pilot was instructed to get his plane re-fueled at Nawab Shar Airport at about 6:15 p.m., almost an hour and half before the plane eventually landed Karachi. It is, therefore, not difficult to conclude that in view of the PMs instructions regarding refueling at Nawab Shah, the Pilot was under no threat on account of shortage of fuel (Page 43).

[/QUOTE]

Those who were flying had an entirely different perception about the threat than what you suggest above. There was concern in the cockpit and the recklessness with which this whole episode was handled is the issue on hand.

 

[qsaark]

The problem is that it was not only the flight of the CoAS which was diverted. There were 200 other citizens of Pakistan on-board who were recklessly put in harms way to protect ones own political career.

This is only a propaganda in order to justify the unconstitutional actions of Musharraf. Musharraf ordered the pilot to lie to the control tower about the fuel. Even than, when Shahid Khaqan Abbasi told NS about the possibility of low fuel, the PM promptly ordered to let the plane land on Nawab Shah and later to Karachi Airport, re-fuel the pane, and take it to Masqat. If this all looks like a story, why the audio spools from the black box (that had recorded all the conversation between the pilot and the ATC) and the fuel log book was not presented in the court? Again all the details are present in the Jurisdiction, please read it. Dont just assume what happened, know it first hand by reading the jurisdiction.

 

[Patriot]

Justice Choudhry was a shrewd guy. He took the oath under the PCO because he believed in “live today, fight tomorrow’. Could he have done what he did if he had taken the retirement like some of the other Justices? Basically Justice Choudhry out maneuvered General Musharraf.

Is this some sort of a joke..?..He is now gonna enjoy more time in SC and earn more money and eventually enter politics.

 

[muse]

No patriot it is not a joke, it is an illustration of the ethics and morality that animates the highest offices in the Judiciary

 

[qsaark]

No patriot it is not a joke, it is an illustration of the ethics and morality that animates the highest offices in the Judiciary

In fact in between the lines I can note how badly you wished Justice Choudhry to resign like other Justices. In other words you wanted him to sacrifice himself on the high alter in the name of ethics and morality and left the judiciary on people like Dogar so Musharraf could stay into power for as long as he pleased to. Justice Choudhry made a very wise decision of staying back and to show his teeth at the right time. Was he not Musharraf who used to give the example of Sulah Hudeybia? This sort of arrangement only applies to Musharraf not to the Justice Choudhry?

 

[Interceptor]

IN true Feudal fashion, you realize this means, yes, revenge and perhaps this may be a service to Pakistan, because it's difficultot imagine that the CJP and the super feudal, (village idiot) Nawaz will survive, even if Musharraf does not :



SC set to take Musharraf’s Nov 3 action case




Sunday, July 19, 2009

By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: The tough fall from grace of the once invisible Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf may just get a trifle more painful as a 14-member bench of the Supreme Court is all set to hear a case that would possibly determine the status of his unconstitutional actions of Nov 3, 2007, and slowly tighten the noose around the former dictator.

A 14-member bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and comprising judges none of whom had taken oath under Musharraf’s PCO is taking up on July 20 a constitutional petition of the Sindh High Car Bar vs Federation and two other appeals, all concerning the appointment of judges.

Sources said that the constitutional questions involved in the case are expected to envelop the Tikka Iqbal case decided by Dogar court in favour of Nov 3 unconstitutional action of Musharraf.

Sources in the Law Ministry confided to The News that the upcoming case of judges’ appointment has all the potential to address thorny issues of Nov 3. These sources said that the ousted dictator, who is presently in London, would soon be trembling with fear as the independent judiciary of Pakistan is poised for the first time in our history to question the unconstitutional actions of a uniformed dictator.

An adverse ruling in this case could also have a domino effect in turn fueling other measures of accountability of the ousted dictator. Already demands to try the dictator under Article 6 of the Constitution are on the rise and Nawaz Sharifís acquittal from the plane high jacking case too has given a new impetus to such demands.

Musharraf, intoxicated by his absolute power, had on Nov 3 abrogated the constitution and removed almost 60 judges of the superior judiciary. The dictator did not even give a fig of a cover to Nov 3 historic judgment of seven-member SC bench led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, which had declared the Nov 3 PCO as unconstitutional and had nullified it almost immediately. The Chief justice and other honourable judges of the Supreme Court and high courts were consequently arrested as Gen Musharraf installed his choice Supreme Court under controversial Justice Dogar.

The Supreme Court has already set the tone over the constitutionality and (ill)legality of Nov 3 actions of Musharraf in its latest judgement in the plane hijacking case against PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif with the judgment evidently being appreciative of the PML-N’s stance on the issue of judges restoration.

PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif’s refusal to appear before the post-Nov 3, 2007, PCO/Dogar court has not been seen as biased or disobedience by the five-member SC bench comprising Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Moosa K Leghari, Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali and Justice Ghulam Rabbani that issued detailed judgment in the plane high jacking case on Friday. No matter that Musharraf’s hand-picked Dogar court had ruled in favour of Nov 3 martial law to his entire satisfaction, the Friday’s judgment accepted petitioner’s (Nawaz Sharif) explanation for non-appearance before Dogar court in the following terms: “...However, on a deeper appreciation of the stance taken and after hearing their (Nawaz Sharif and others) learned counsel, it has been found by us that petitioner’s non-appearance was not attributable to a personal bias against the Court then constituted but on account of a public stand that they had taken before entering the process of elections i.e. the collective oath which they and all the party candidates had taken on the issues relating to the Imposition of ‘State of Emergency’ on 3rd of November, 2007 and a resolve to launch a movement for the restoration of superior judiciary. The restoration of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan and other judges who were deposed on the imposition of ‘State of Emergency’ and the immediate appearance of the petitioners by way of filing these review petitions indicate that the stance taken was based on a certain moral grounds which stood vindicated. The same cannot be dubbed as either contumacious or reflective of acquiescence to warrant the impugned findings.”

The judgment also reproduced certain parts of the petition describing Nov 3 action as deviation from the constitution and seeking condoning of the delay to file appeal before the Supreme Court. The judgment says, “That it is a matter of record that the petitioner had, on his return to Pakistan, publicly pledged, at the very outset, neither to accept nor to condone the aforesaid constitutional deviation whereby, inter alia, 63 hon’ble Judges of the Superior Courts had been forcibly restrained from continuing to perform their judicial functions. It was because of this reason that all the candidates of the Pakistan Muslim League (N) contesting General Election 2008, pledged on oath to restore the judiciary to pre November 3, 2007 position, and this ceremony of collective oath of Pakistan Muslim League (N) candidates was widely publicized and covered by the media.

Moreover, the petitioner had repeatedly declared that he will not appear before the judges of the Superior Courts till the entire set of judges who were illegally deposed on November 3, 2007, including the hon’ble Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, were restored.”

The stand taken by the petitioner in the above paragraphs was also taken before the Supreme Court in Sharifs’ review petition against their disqualification order by the PCO judges. In that petition too, the present Supreme Court decided in their favour. From the looks of it, according to one leading lawyer, “If I was Musharraf, I would be a very worried man indeed”.

BS!....

Right now the country doesn't want another dilemma, Ansar is just chatting out of his *&#%. Mush isn't running away...He cant.

There is no political maturity right now to try him, parties like MQM, JUIF and PML-Q will oppose it this will destabilize the fragile political climate. Than where will this end if this case is opened is that the only case the country wants the Judiciary to finalize. This is political witch hunting. The CJP has lost that opportunity to disqualify Mush, I doubt this is true Ansar is spin doctor.

If the constitution is amended. The black laws are removed than that would be enough to put this behind us.

 

[Bane Blade]

I wasn't able to go through the whole of the debate though I remember them stating in the news that the prosecution withdrew its argument that puts the SC in no choice but to acquit Nawaz

 

[BATMAN]

N.S. cannot be aquited from the case without convicting Musharraf. One of them has to be guilty! and why does two cheifs are deciding differently.
Ironicaly it was iftikhar ch. as cheif justice both times around!!!

It is obviously a big mess and big question mark on iftikhar ch. and justice under present govt.

imagine govt. did not bothered to issue explanation and neither processions are being made public.

 

[muse]

Here we go boys and girls:


SHCBA petition expanded to review emergency validation: Only restored judges to review Nov 3 actions

* No PCO judge included in 14-member bench, 3-member bench headed by CJP had observed on May 28 that a larger bench could be formed to review verdict in Tikka Iqbal case

By Masood Rehman

ISLAMABAD: A 14-member larger bench of the Supreme Court (SC), comprised entirely of judges who did not take oath under the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO), is likely to formally start the review today (Monday) of a verdict validating the November 3, 2007 state of emergency imposed by General (r) Pervez Musharraf.

The bench was initially formed to hear a petition filed by the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) against the federal government under Article 184 of the constitution, demanding that the services of two additional judges of the SHC be regularised. The bench is also scheduled to hear two other appeals concerning the appointment of judges. However, during the preliminary hearing on May 28, 2009, a three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry observed that the SC decision in the Tikka Iqbal Muhammad Khan case, declaring judges sacked after the 2007 emergency were “past and closed transaction”, could be reviewed. The bench observed that a larger SC bench could be formed to review the decision if required.

Headed by the chief justice and comprising Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Ghulam Rabbani, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, the 14-member bench has directed Attorney General Sardar Latif Khan Khosa and the Sindh advocate general to appear on notice.

Potential: A senior lawyer told Daily Times the SC larger bench would determine the status of Musharraf’s actions of November 3, 2007. He said the SHCBA petition had the potential to address all disputed issues concerning the events of November 3,2007.

On November 24, 2007, a seven-member larger bench of the SC, headed by then chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, validated General (r) Musharraf’s declaration of emergency as army chief and provided a blanket cover to all his actions. In its order, the bench held that judges who did not take oath under the PCO had ceased to be members of the court and their cases could not be reopened. Citing the “doctrine of necessity”, the court held that when the constitution provided no remedy or satisfactory solution to an issue threatening national security, the doctrine could be invoked.

According to the court judgement, terror attacks, suicide bombings and kidnappings had rendered the situation in Pakistan very unstable. The court also declared all the extra-constitutional steps of proclamation of emergency and others valid. In absence of parliament, the court said, General (r) Musharraf, in pursuance of the proclamation of emergency, might in the larger public interest and the safety, security and integrity of Pakistan - under the principle of salus populi suprema lex (‘Let the good of the people be the supreme law’) - perform all acts or legislative measures which are in accordance with, or could have been made under the 1973 Constitution, including the power to amend it; all acts which tend to advance or promote the good of the people; and perform all acts required to be done for the ordinary orderly running of the state.

 

[muse]

Musharraf is being asked to fall on his sword, for the sake of Pakistan, it is being argued - - Dal mein kala:

‘Musharraf should not join politics’

LAHORE: Former president Pervez Musharraf should not join politics, as it would be a big mistake, Awami Muslim League President Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said on Sunday. Talking to Daily Times Editor-in-Chief Najam Sethi on Dunya TV, Rashid said he did not foresee a future for Musharraf in politics. He said PML-Q dissident leader Humayun Akhtar and his colleagues had lost the battle for the PML-Q and should leave the party honourably. daily times monitor