Panama Case - Post Verdict Discussion and Updates

[maxpayne]

Plllllllease!

Since you did fall for the harsh criticism so easily as I had guessed while writing my post, I shall not lecture you on morality in this reply.

Read my post again my friend. I have learned this much observing the way the Sharif crimes syndicate hideously ridicules judiciary personally; only their verdicts can be criticized...and this right is only what I have directly exercised in my post - criticizing the verdict and equating it with the same of the past. Malik Qayyum is a known black sheep of a former Judge and no body can argue with his intentions as to what they were, in favour of his master's as in Sharifs, to whom he had sold his soul and his honourable position as a judge.

As for the part in the verdict putting the blame on NAB for Hudaibya case mishandling, why did these Honourable judges not initiate or order criminal proceedings against those in NAB and the prosecution responsible for "abusing" Sharif family, lol, did they forget or have they suddenly lost their authority all of a sudden? Or a convenient restraint shown in the verdict for something utterly criminal and abusive in the eyes of the same judgement.

What differentiates us from Noony toons is that we call a spade a spade. Remember, according to the law of the land, judgements can be criticised and discussed in public - this is a public forum.

Yes judgement can be discussed but judges cannot be. Their are blacksheep in politics, judiciary and everywhere. But we must respect those who deserve it. Further, NAB is a seperate institution and govt or judiciary cannot dictate them their work. They should their self me moral enough to investigate every case honestly. They are our brothers and sorry to say their are blacksheep everywhere. Judges hands are tied in this legally.

 

[Shane]

Yes judgement can be discussed but judges cannot be. Their are blacksheep in politics, judiciary and everywhere. But we must respect those who deserve it. Further, NAB is a seperate institution and govt or judiciary cannot dictate them their work. They should their self me moral enough to investigate every case honestly. They are our brothers and sorry to say their are blacksheep everywhere. Judges hands are tied in this legally.

Don't be so easily agreeable with the propaganda of victimization of our incorrigible friends as in the noony toons stubbornly going on a defence of the indefensible. This verdict is so unbalanced that it contradicts itself. The judges find themselves that NAB was inept and pressurized Sharifs - which is illegal or not? If the very judgement is based on a finding against NAB then why there is a gaping hole in the judgement with respect to consequences for those responsible? Why did the verdict not hold NAB officials accountable for their wrong doings. The reality is in the details my friend.

is NAB above SCP - NO CONSEQUENCES for a finding that changes the whole case on its head - WOW , This is indeed a verdict to be remembered for ages.

But we must respect those who deserve it.

Your words worth their weight in gold.

Our honourable judges of the scp it seems have decided to stop holding people responsible for contempt of court ever since Nawaz Sharif, Maryam and their stooges began to publicly malign, abuse, threaten and loath the Judges of Supreme Court. It's a free for all but only if you belong to the Sharif crimes syndicate.

I will however continue to criticize the verdicts and the criminals who get relief from the same.

 

[PakSword]

Courts does not works the way you or me wants. Law says that NAB should present proof and witnesses when filing a case. Instead of providing legal evidences, NAB started bit-ching aien baein shein. Legally NAB lost the case and courts follow law.

And when prosecutor wanted to read out the Panama verdict, these low level scums called "the judges" said that they will issue contempt..

And when prosecutor brought JIT findings, these low level scums called "the judges" said that JIT's findings shouldn't influence the case.. But then these low level scums didn't allow NAB to find out the truth..

So.. JIT findings are useless, NAB can't use them.. Panama verdict? No no no.. we will issue the contempt.. OK... can we investigate again.. No..

LOLZ

Yes judgement can be discussed but judges cannot be.

What's the reason judges are referred to Supreme Judicial Council during their service?

What if a verdict seems to be a rhetoric of one party?

Also, we shouldn't criticize Justice Qayyum, Justice Dogar, Molvi Mushtaq, and many others who are in fact black sheep in the judicial history of Pakistan?

O bhai, judges aren't prophets.. they are humans and are sometimes infected with the diseases affecting their morality and integrity.. either we should alleviate the status of these judges to prophets (nauzubillah) or keep a close eye on them.. if one black sheep is found, criticize him/ her fully..

 

[Dil Pakistan]

And this madam @farah even didn't bother to reply on my tagged post. I see she does not care about law and constitution, and just want courts to give decision as per her likeness. This is high level of hypocrisy to accept one thing happily from same court and defame the judges when they do not give verdict as per likeness!

Actually! you didn't make any point in your post that was worth replying. Any reply to your post would have been just argumentative, and (I think) for this reason @Farah Sohail didn't reply.

I am very happy to give reply that you want.

Just write your points that you wish to have the replies off, and I will oblige.

@PakSword

 

[maxpayne]

Don't be so easily agreeable with the propaganda of victimization of our incorrigible friends as in the noony toons stubbornly going on a defence of the indefensible. This verdict is so unbalanced that it contradicts itself. The judges find themselves that NAB was inept and pressurized Sharifs - which is illegal or not? If the very judgement is based on a finding against NAB then why there is a gaping hole in the judgement with respect to consequences for those responsible? Why did the verdict not hold NAB officials accountable for their wrong doings. The reality is in the details my friend.

is NAB above SCP - NO CONSEQUENCES for a finding that changes the whole case on its head - WOW , This is indeed a verdict to be remembered for ages.


Your words worth their weight in gold.

Our honourable judges of the scp it seems have decided to stop holding people responsible for contempt of court ever since Nawaz Sharif, Maryam and their stooges began to publicly malign, abuse, threaten and loath the Judges of Supreme Court. It's a free for all but only if you belong to the Sharif crimes syndicate.

I will however continue to criticize the verdicts and the criminals who get relief from the same.

Firstly, NAB is not answerable to any court on his performance. Head of NAB is appointed by president and not by courts. Secondly, yes you have the right to discuss judgement, but you can never swear or use bad words for judges. Agree?

 

[maxpayne]

And when prosecutor wanted to read out the Panama verdict, these low level scums called "the judges" said that they will issue contempt..

And when prosecutor brought JIT findings, these low level scums called "the judges" said that JIT's findings shouldn't influence the case.. But then these low level scums didn't allow NAB to find out the truth..

So.. JIT findings are useless, NAB can't use them.. Panama verdict? No no no.. we will issue the contempt.. OK... can we investigate again.. No..

LOLZ



What's the reason judges are referred to Supreme Judicial Council during their service?

What if a verdict seems to be a rhetoric of one party?

Also, we shouldn't criticize Justice Qayyum, Justice Dogar, Molvi Mushtaq, and many others who are in fact black sheep in the judicial history of Pakistan?

O bhai, judges aren't prophets.. they are humans and are sometimes infected with the diseases affecting their morality and integrity.. either we should alleviate the status of these judges to prophets (nauzubillah) or keep a close eye on them.. if one black sheep is found, criticize him/ her fully..

I expected better from you PakSword. Ok I will elaborate more. You cannot criticize serving judges. You can discuss the verdict, but cannot criticize judgement. They are not angels, but they have their own way of cleanship. You and me do not have right to question authenticity or morality of a specific judge

 

[maxpayne]

Actually! you didn't make any point in your post that was worth replying. Any reply to your post would have been just argumentative, and (I think) for this reason @Farah Sohail didn't reply.

I am very happy to give reply that you want.

Just write your points that you wish to have the replies off, and I will oblige.

@PakSword

She maligned judges if you read her post again!

 

[The Accountant]

I expected better from you PakSword. Ok I will elaborate more. You cannot criticize serving judges. You can discuss the verdict, but cannot criticize judgement. They are not angels, but they have their own way of cleanship. You and me do not have right to question authenticity or morality of a specific judge

And exactly why not? These judges are there to provide us justice and we are not subject of judges and government... We have every right to ask them about the performance... So stop making silly legal argument just like NS... SC is court of Justice and not just court of law and can go beyond limits defined by the law if it is for provide the Justice as this duty is given to them as per constitution...

 

[PakSword]

You cannot criticize serving judges.

Ok now i understand.. you have to wait till their retirement to criticize them.

And judges can only be referred to SJC for any misconduct after retirement.

cannot criticize judgement.

Wrong.

 

[maxpayne]

Ok now i understand.. you have to wait till their retirement to criticize them.

And judges can only be referred to SJC for any misconduct after retirement.



Wrong.

[emoji106]

 

[El_Swordsmen]

FINALLYY !!
MUCH NEEDED SUO MOTO

She maligned judges if you read her post again!

She gave her POV ... you should read all her posts from first panama thread as well & then jump to conclusions.

 

[QatariPrince]

 

[maxpayne]

FINALLYY !!
MUCH NEEDED SUO MOTO

View attachment 446942

View attachment 446943

View attachment 446944



She gave her POV ... you should read all her posts from first panama thread as well & then jump to conclusions.

Another lawyer of her. She maligned judges and I cannot accept that. POV has limits. If you don't understand stay away and don't advocate her.

 

[Shane]

Firstly, NAB is not answerable to any court on his performance. Head of NAB is appointed by president and not by courts. Secondly, yes you have the right to discuss judgement, but you can never swear or use bad words for judges. Agree?

You really are incorrigible my dear dear friend...we are not talking about appointments meri jan but SCP can hold NAB accountable just like it can any other institution but the three judges who found them at fault have conveniently choosen not to against the very finding of their own verdict that NAB is at fault. Flabbergasted is the word...

 

[PakSword]

Another lawyer of her. She maligned judges and I cannot accept that. POV has limits. If you don't understand stay away and don't advocate her.

Bro, there is a reason that there is a body called SJC.

Our history has given us Justice Abdul Qayyum, Molvi Mushtaq, Justice Dogar, Justice Khleeq uz Zamaan, Justice Naseem Hasan Shah type judges. Sadly, our judicial history is full of such names and that's the reason why our country has reached this low.

I have met court judges in my life who asked me 1 million rupees to write the judgement myself. It seems you have not been involved with Pakistani judiciary at all.

In 1998, it was Mr. Khaleeq uz Zamaan who allegedly received brief case full of currency and revolted against the then CJ, because he called NS in contempt of court. Judiciary maligned judiciary and that will remain a black spot in the judicial history of Pakistan. He was awarded with the governor's post in exchange of his services to the government.

And who doesn't know about Molvi Mushtaq? Even judges today don't refer to his bench's verdict. People criticize the judgements and it's their right.

What you are saying is true during the proceeding of a case. Even then you can ask to change the bench if you have valid concerns about the judges.

Today I was reading somewhere that one man is in jail because he stole 400 rupees 19 years back. He is in jail since then. What a poor soul.

Due to our judicial history, we will have to keep our eyes open, and the reports are that NS is trying to repeat the episode of 1998 again. You never know this time Justice Qazi Isaa plays the role of Justice Khaliq uz Zamaan. If you read the verdict, you will know what we are talking about. Almost every one on media and in the bar councils is making fun of the verdict.

I would like to humbly request you to read 1- the note written by Justice Khosa when he recused himself from the bench, 2- Hudaibiya verdict written by Justice Qazi Isa's bench. Once you read these two gems, please provide your point of view here and then we can discuss the merits of both.