Jokingjustice
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2016
- Messages
- 67
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
JOKING JUSTICE - 2
UNDER OUR PAKISTANI DEFINITION
A FAIR PAPER FROM A SENIOR CITIZEN
FOR
STUDENTS STUDY AND ANALYSIS
IN ALL THIS FIND ANY INGREDIENT OF JUSTICE*
(*AS IS DEFINED IN WORLD DICTIONARIES)
The unfortunate nation the past whole fortnight saw how it looked that everyone worth of his last labeled “opposition” was crying loudest possible as if he would take the Prime Minister to task right on the floor of assembly if PM’s answers did not correspond “to-the-point”. Then, as the ordinary expected, the same lot jointly came up in sympathies to the same very PM earlier accused of. Same is the condition of Justice in our beloved homeland. There are ever growing tall and taller claims of justice, free justice, justice at door step, justice at gross route level, reforms in justice process but practical true naked fact always is that likewise the opposition the justice stands up at the end of the day in sympathy and defence of the elite or the culprit. Last month Daily New York Times in an article stated that there were developments like tall high rise in Pakistan but no justice. In our homeland a few years back commoner was made to day dream and was fooled that the judiciary was taking a new birth and that the “Dhartee ho gee Maan kay jaysee”. World Bank money (donation) came for reforms in the ombudsman system (another judicial system) but what factually, really and practically happened? Lawyers fees sky rocketed becoming out of reach of a commoner unless he was earning through some clandestine way and the ombudsman system, in the words of late Justice Nizam just “delivered Decisions” but not “arrived at justice”. A judge’s name appeared in the Panama Leaks but our “justice” till this date is sleeping and hopefully will….
2. Justice, real true justice as is defined in the international dictionaries, there is no doubt, just not merely is drifting rather has almost drifted away from the common man. Today there are claims, tall claims in shape of figures of justice, in shape of statements, press conferences, costly off-set paper bound heavy annual reports, but not the true justice.
PROPER DELIVERY OF NOTICE:
3. Delivery of Notice, universally, is the first and the top most important essential ingredient of a true fair honest justice system. A defective service of Notice in practice is a step to deny justice if not murder the justice; a top scared divine duty. As to defeat the opponent party many tactics are used; like getting frequent adjournments, another such a tactic is “to arrange” defective service of Notice which could lead to ex-parte decision. Once, perhaps two decades back in good times, I saw a Notice from a Gujranwala court to an Overseas Pakistani. His name and the country on the envelope was written in English but building No. area and city in Urdu. It was done knowingly that the envelope containing the Notice may reach the country abroad but the postal authorities there would not be able to read Urdu hence definitely delayed leading to ex-parte decision. An official in a court, in a
tribunal, in a commission, or in any ombudsman office, in enquiry commission who is not aware of or does not recognize this importance and the institution concerned lacking this universal knowledge, to this senior citizen both are incompetent to hold such a scared post. When a court-martialed person can be appointed as MD PIA or an intermediate as Chairman OGRA, posting of such incompetent persons on scared posts, today, brings no surprise at all.
BACKGROUND FACTS:
4. Two such Notices sent one by the Federal Ombudsman Office Islamabad and the other by the Sindh Ombudsman Karachi reached me too late. A formal complaint against the Pakistan Post Office was filed with the Federal Ombudsman. Almost every evening on mini screen one hears, and rightly, that the performance of all the national institutions have deteriorated. No one listens properly to the poor man. We individually almost all have our personal experiences of it. So rightly a question arises, from where comes ever increasing so huge figures of justice delivered and invisible good governance prevailing the nation so frequently is forced to listen to? 28,000 complaints, for example, were lodged with the Federal Ombudsman against electricity companies out of which 25,000 were against inflated billings. If the Federal Ombudsman is providing relief, a million worth question arises then why there is no decrease in complaints against the electricity companies? Companies in such a situation must had ben now afraid of from issuing inflated bills fearing people were approaching the Federal Ombudsman! But are these companies today really afraid of? If they are today afraid of from accountability there should not be any more inflated bills. But if there still are and growing inflated bills complaints then it means there is no relief/justice in practical terms. Facts are before us.
SERVICE OF TWO NOTICES:
5. Two “Notices” one by the Federal Ombudsman Islamabad and the other by the Sindh Ombudsman Karachi were issued. These two Notices had “target fixed dates” for action by the addressee but reached too late. A formal complaint was made against the Pakistan Post from where these Notices started their journey and whose lethargic naked shameful inefficiency caused this delay. The way this complaint was handled super-glued the already cemented belief that the senior Advisor to the Federal Ombudsman dealing with the complainant as investigation officer was not experienced to deal with and, rather, had full sympathy with the nakedly defaulting Pakistan Post (detailed hereunder).
DISPOSAL AND REJECTION OF COMPLAINT
6. The complaint was rejected which in other simple words this complainant was termed wrong and the Pakistan Post Office was, despite a naked self speaking proof lying on the table, absolved of any mal administration encouraging it to keep continue working wrongly as in the two notices in question.
SUMMONED
7. The complaint was that the Pakistan Post neglected its duty which caused delay. Naked, repeat clearly naked, proof was on the table of the dealing Advisor but he summoned this complainant for a hearing in Islamabad which would had cost him Rs. 2 lac approximately. Was there any remotest real need of summoning this complainant in the Hearing?
8. It was most probably late 1980s. I raised a complaint that the Banks were madly “using” private courier service leaving the then most efficient reliable and competitive Pakistan Post “Urgent Mail Service”. I quoted a Government notification according to which the government institutions were required to give an edge to the state-products over the private ones. To my memories in this old age, Mr. Justice Aslam Riaz was the Federal Ombudsman (or A. Salam?) and still true justice existed. He took the complaint seriously. A meeting was scheduled in the demised Pakistan Banking Council attended by all the 5 commercial banks and the Pakistan Post (a director from Islamabad). {Can I file a same or similar complaint today? It would definitely not be entertained on the plea that I was not an aggrieved, ombudsman can only entertain matters of mal administration etc and suggestions).
9. The Federal Ombudsman then on the chair did not summon me for the Hearing in the above case despite the fact it involved presentation as to the basis of my data viz volume of business to the courier and that to the post office - perhaps it was that Justice Aslam Riaz was not that competent enough as compared to today’s most of the senior Advisors in the Federal Ombudsman Office are. Provincial ombudsmen advisors too appear to be incompetent that they don’t summon overseas complainants. Or perhaps, it was because now the present day Ombudsman system stands “reformed” with world bank “donated money” hence Rs. 2 lac of a common man is not that much for today’s ombudsman system-reformed-advisers. And since system was not yet “reformed” then, hence the system headed by Justice Sardar Iqbal/justice Aslam Riaz Hussain and their unreformed-advisers never summoned complainants like me from abroad. Sometime mid 1990s the then Sindh Ombudsman over a cup of tea told me that he did not summon a complainant even from Sanghar let alone from Bahrain knowing what does summoning in practice meant.
10. Though out of context yet for general interest of young students. When I filed above complaint about banks preferring, for certain obvious reasons known to me like thousands of others, the 1972 Bhutto inducted over dozed politics in government department had already started affecting the service. In the meeting scheduled in Pakistan Banking Council, to represent the Pakistan Post Office came to attend Director International Mail slamabad who had nothing whatsoever remotest to do with urgent mail service. Later it transpired he had a marriage to attend so he availed this opportunity of official ticket and TA/DA to cover up the marriage. He did what exactly such influentially backed directors, consultants, advisors usually and mostly do. Since urgent mail service was not his matter or section, he did not had any knowledge at all on it. In the meeting showing totally his worth he submitted that his department was satisfied with the share of business his department was having from the banks. He and his department had in fact not an iota of idea how much business the banking was generating and out of that how much was being diverted towards private couriers and how much to Pakistan Post. Technically this ordinary citizen had afforded an opportunity for the Department to fetch business but since decline had started it was lost through a lethargic representative. The Federal Ombudsman however did not accept this reply of Director International Mail and directed the Bank in the final Finding to desist from mad use of private courier based on my detailed contention.
11. Was there any real remotest whatsoever need of the complainant necessary in the Hearing? A point to ponder for the researchers and law students.
REJECTION:
12. The first Notice (copy envelope attached marked “A”) was desptched by the Federal Ombudsman Secretariat Islamabad for delivery abroad. Every commoner today has the average general knowledge that postage as well as international phone call rates both for local within Pakistan and those for foreign countries are different and higher. If it is not known, perhaps, it is the Federal Ombudsman concerned staff where sits a high ranking Commissioner to deal with Overseas Pakistanis and also an ex-Pakistani Ambassador. While the common man knows that within Pakistan local rates were less and foreign are higher (how much does not matter), the Federal Ombudsman staff perhaps think foreign postage is free i.e Rs. 00.00. The notice was sent under Rs. 00.00 postage paid which in other simple Pakistani ordinary street language means “Bayrang”.
13. The Federal Ombudsman office does not use traditional postage paper-stamps and dropped letters like a common man does in a road side letter box. The office uses franking machine and as per procedure the letters are then by hand handed over at the counter of the post office where franking machine was registered. The post office staff not just proving its professional worth but also showing its more efficiency than the federal ombudsman office staff, accepted this letter with Rs. 00.00 postage affixed and forwarded to the Islamabad International Mail Section where each piece meant for abroad, as per procedure, is supposed invariably individually checked for proper postage paid. The under paid articles here are retained, sent back to the sender with the slip advising to recoup the deficient paid. It further appears this held-up particular envelope started its journey back to the sender through connected delivery-zone-post office but slipped once again without doing the shortfall. The Islamabad International Mail Office proving its practical “professional high diligence” let the envelope fly out. This all process appeared to had consumed a considerable time within Islamabad with the result it ultimately reached to the final destination abroad with considerable delay.
14. The second Notice was posted by the Sindh Ombudsman on 05.01.2015 for delivery in the “Kingdom of Bahrain” in a Persian Gulf country (copy envelope attached marked “B”). The postal staff showing its present day efficiency, perhaps busy in one hand on mobiles with half attention towards the duty rather instead of sending it to International Mail Office sent it to “Bahrain” a small military-operation-affected remote town situate in Swat KP Province. It was received in “Bahrain” (Pakistani town) on 15.01.2015 when the postmaster (Assistant sub-postmaster) forwarded it to Islamabad International Mail Office for sending it to the Kingdom of Bahrain in the Gulf (Post mark stamp clearly visible}. Someone interested in administrative research can ring the
postmaster Bahrain (Swat) who will verify weekly he receives dozens such wrongly directed to him letters which he then re-directs to the correct destination viz Gulf Kingdom of Bahrain. When Sawat/Bahrain Town postmaster returned, the Islamabad International Mail office adding its efficiency sent it, as is apparent from the envelope, to K.S.A (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) totally another country.
POST OFFICE DEFENE:
15. Mr. Hafizur Rehman not other than the ex-Director General Federal Ombudsman Secretariat Islamabad, himself once stated early 1990s that the bureaucracy working in the Ombudsman office had by now shifted their sympathies from the suffering common man to their counterpart brethren bureaucrats sitting in their parent departments. His words have of late proved beyond any reasonable doubt. Similarly as a fortnight back the nation witnessed both ruling and opposition in effect practically hand-in-glove with each other viz slow poison the Panama leaks.
16. Pakistan Post took a defence that delivery of Notices were via a Post Box in the Kingdom of Bahrain hence this delay could be that the complainant collected his mail from the post box late. Post Office further added that as per Universal Postal Union Convention the complainant should had filed a complaint to that effect with the Bahrain Post Office where delay must had occurred. Our senior bureaucrats can “manufacture” a new twist and a new lies without any remotest haste or morality suiting to each new situation. To explain this I can quote more but would restrict to only one self speaking. One Hearing Notice reached me too late and I approached the DG Pakistan Post about this delay. I attach herewith a copy marked “C” the DG directing PMG Karachi and PMG Islamabad directing both of the to investigate “personally” and report back to him (DG Post) “immediately. Reading of this “C” this senior citizen is more than confident would not give AD(I) any shame that while he was telling the Federal Ombudsman that the complaint should under international law be filed with Bahrain delivery post office, yet his chief boss was directing an investigating. The most sorrowful is the senior advisor in the Federal Ombudsman believed him. Remembering his statement before the Ombudsman and seeing “C” I am sure AD(I) would explain that his DG was totally incompetent and ignorant of universal legal position and under his incompetency he order an illegal investigation locally. (I have used the word “shame” here because today it is a parliamentary word last year repeatedly used in the parliament with no objection from the Speaker).
17, Since lies don’t had foundations, the appearing AD(I) proved he was just “manufacturing” a defence. The bureaucrat in the Federal Ombudsman having sympathies with the postal bureaucrat sitting before him and caring more for him, also completely sided and favoured him. Had this investigation officer been truly fair and judicious, which is not a too big wish, he would never had ignored that the complaint was not against late delivery rather the complainant had raised the issue before the Ombudsman that the Department did not give any response to his reminders for providing him a copy of the Investigation report earlier ordered by the DG Pakistan Post. For the students of law and researchers it may be important here that the then Federal Ombudsman and the then Chief Justice SHC jointly stated that “non response by the government functionaries was the mother cause of public frustration”. The investigation officer in the Federal Ombudsman very conveniently playing on the defence of Pakistan Post targeted only the “delay” but “not the non response” termed the mother cause by his own Chief viz the Federal Ombudsman.
18. As I said our bureaucrats manufacture and twist to each new situation similarly as Fawad Chaudhary Advocate who was yesterday evening was not tired of counting achievements of General Pervaiz Musharraf, the very next morning the General was out of chair, listening same Fawad in favour of PPP was marvelous. While AD(I) was saying under universal law investigation should be done by Bahrain Post, I attach as “E” a letter from the Department of AD(I), Asstt. Dy. Director General (QS) [senior to AD(I)] while conveying that “investigation has been done” which under AD(I) argument should not had been, was manufacturing a new defence that under universal law no “claim” can be made. The fact is I had never made any claim viz any compensation etc. Here the ADD (QS) like the bureaucratic tribe did not feel any hesitation that there was an envelope lying on her table showing Pakistani two stamp stamp and Rs. 00.00 postage page.
19. The Senior Advisor Ombudsman Secretariat in the eyes of this senior citizen since lacked the basic practical knowledge of postal system or secondarily due to inherited sympathies for the postal bureaucrat sitting before him, completely ignored the harsh truths lying on his table in shape of Photostats of two envelopes and fully sympathized and agreed to this contention of the defaulting post office.
20. The Final Decision on my complaint was issued on 01 Dec 2015 but this senior citizen holding practically Holy Quran in my hand can affirm on solemn affirmation that he has till today not received his that copy of the Decision under the procedure post mailed to me as per the system. May be due to similar efficiency same went to Bahrain Town in Sawat and from there Saudi Arabia. It shows how dependent is our international mail office. I got an email copy of the same 19 May 2016, on my request, thanks for the kind attention of Assistant Registrar Federal Ombudsman Secretariat.
STUDY TIPS FOR STUDENTS OF LAW
21. For the students of Law this senior citizen affectionately wishes to put the following valuable completely relevant points which might help them not just in study of law but also in true dispensation and delivery of justice in their future life as a Judge, a Lawyer or posting in the ever expanding ombudsman system.
POSTAL KNOWLEDGE:
22. Though unnecessary and unrelated yet a note here. This senior citizen himself or none of his family member during the last 50-60 years is known to have ever worked in the post office. However, when in 1980s I filed one or two complaints against Pakistan Post Office one quoted above, the then Federal Ombudsman in his Final Decision wrote “the complainant had filed the complaint against his own ex Department”. He took me as an employee of the Department noting the appreciable knowledge I expressed pleading my complaints. A person who deals with a subject, is rightly supposed first to apprise himself with the basic knowledge relating to that. For example Raza Rabbani is asked to investigate Panama Leaks, it is not expecting too much from him that before touching the file he apprised himself a little what were the offshore companies, who how why and for what purpose these are established.
UNIVERSAL DOCTRINE NOT KNOWN
IN OUR TODAY’s OMBUDSMAN SYSTEM
23. All the law students know well that dealing with justice related issues, the very first invariable evaluation universally made and exercised is to see WHEN, WHY and WHERE the cause of complaint arose. All subsequent developments taking place later are given secondary attention or importance. An example to understand. The whole ombudsman system started its journey toward deterioration 1993-1995. Till before, the system as a whole was really working according to the international standards and norms. Sindh Home Department on my written by post-mailed letter-type-request granted approval for issuance of an arms licence to me. Accordingly, then, I filled up the prescribed Arms Licence Application Form, affixed fee in shape of stamps and deposited the application in the prescribed way. A receipt was issued asking me to collect the Licence after two weeks. Before that date, Sindh Government banned issuance of new Licences. Licence to me was stopped. The then Sindh Ombudsman, not a Judge but God blessed with quality of doing justice (Mr. S.M. Munir, a bureaucrat) refused to accept this stand of the Home Department. He observed that the Home Department had already granted approval based on the applicant’s credentials when there was no ban. It was now only a normal formality of issuance of an Arms Licence Booklet. The ban, he declared, under the universal principle thus did not apply on this case. This is what today almost majority of advisors, senior advisors or ombudsmen unfortunately today do not know.
24. The senior advisor detailed on national expense to deal with sacred justice not just apparently lacking knowledge of above universal doctrine but also Hafizur Rehman’s worded sympathies with the post office bureaucrat, kept his eyes away from the two copies of envelopes lying on his table. Had he any knowledge of the justice system, by just a normal glance on envelope “B” he would had nakedly seen that the envelope “B” started its journey on 05 Jan 2015 instead going towards West on the other side of the sea moved on the opposite direction East landing in Sawat/Bahrain.
23. It landed on 15 Jan 2015 in Pakistani Bahrain, 07 days after starting its journey. Thus visible to every sane soul that the damage viz first 07 days delay had already occurred within Pakistan which under the universal doctrine “cause of complaint arisen and damage occurred”. Not judicious and not fair senior advisor discussed the issue only aftermaths of the damage as the post office wished.
25. The senior advisor did not raise the million worth question as to how a letter for foreign delivery started its journey with Rs. 00.00 postage paid? A judicious and fair advisor would had in the larger interest of justice system as well as for the future good of his own Secretariat taken the issue more serious and taken to task the staff concerned in his own office. But completely ignoring and side tracking it, he saved his own office staff on the cost of good reputation of the Secretariat.
26. The senior advisor I am sure did not know that that though his staff paid Rs. 00.00 postage, the international mail office Islamabad showing its criminal negligence passed it forward, the postal department senior management killed the matter yet the Pakistani nation suffered a financial loss; viz that this nation would pay to the Bahrain postal department appropriate sum on this envelope under the universal postal convention. Causing of any financial loss may that be just a Paisa due to negligence at any level is an act of mal administration punishable and recoverable.
UNDER INTERNATIONA LAW
27. The AD (I) Pakistan Post in order to prove this complainant wrong, took the argument that under the Universal Postal Union procedure to which Pakistan was a signatory, this complaint should had been filed with Bahrain Postal Authorities and the Senior Advisor being himself a bureaucrat just in routine sympathy with another bureaucrat sitting before him but also due to his own ignorance accepted this argument. Pakistan Post Office wanted to say why this delay could not be at Bahrain end and not in Pakistan.
28. The above argument that delay could be at Bahrain end and the complaint should had been complained there, in principle holds good but since this senior citizen is not that wise and capable as that those two bureaucrats, he did not do this because he loved his motherland Pakistan and could not think of shaming the motherland sitting in a foreign land as was the AD(I) suggested to do.
29. I could had been most shameless had I done what AD(I) suggested despite knowing one letter was posted under Rs. 00.00. I am sure the Senior Advisor despite the fact envelope copy lying on his table had not raised the question “is accepting and forwarding letter under Rs. 00.00 under international universal postal union rule”? This senior citizen since is not that fully blind as AD(I) Pakistan Post might have thought, hence seeing nakedly prominent that letter posted on 05 Jan 2015 from Karachi travelled to West rather than East and first landed in a Swat Town Bahrain on 15 Jan 2015 then with what shameless face I could had asked the Bahrain Post that delay was on their part.
ORDINARY LETTER – CAN’T BE
PROVED WHEN DELIVERED
30. Pakistan Post argued that the complainant’s address was that of a post box hence no one can ascertain when he actually collected the mail from his post box after delivery. It is, in principle, quite a sound argument but holds no good in presence of two envelopes one having Rs. 00.00 postage but more specifically showing the sheer negligence that that travelled towards East rather than West and 07 days it consumed reaching to a wrong destination (Bahrain town in Swat). A money taken as bribe from the very first step remains “haram” despite later regularly annually paying tax, zakat and declaring in returns.
EVEN IF A PROOF EXISTED?
31. Pakistan Post Office argues and Senior Advisor, himself a bureaucrat in the words of Hafizur Rehman feeling sympathy for the postal bureaucrat accepts this argument. No doubt there is never a proof of actual date of delivery of an ordinary letter but what value such a proof has, say in the eyes of our ombudsman system, has there been such a proof existing?
32. A friend of mine made a complaint against a Bank in Karachi. The Ombudsman office sent Bank’s reply to the complainant for his rejoinder. The Ombudsman issued his Final Decision that since the complainant did not respond hence the case was closed. The complaint knowing well that the matter under the procedure needed to be taken with Bahrain Post did that. He received through proper channel a photo-copy of the Delivery Slip. In Pakistan when a postman is handed over a Registered Letter for delivery, he is also handed over a small slip containing registered number, name of post office article booked, addressee’s address, a date stamp showing date handed over to the postman. In the evening the postman returns that Delivery Slip containing signature of the recipient, date (and office stamp if addressee is an office). This copy of Delivery Receipt showed the signature and name of person who received it in ombudsman office with date of receipt. It showed the complainant’s rejoinder quoted in the Final Closing Order as having not been received, was in effect properly received in the Ombudsman Office complete 06 days before the decision was written.
33. The complainant submitting a copy of this Certificate of Delivery prayed that serious investigation to this serious matter be conducted that where went a week long ago received complainant’s rejoinder, who was responsible for this sheer negligence which deprived the complainant from justice. Instead of having any remotest feeling about the guilt of his own Secretariat, the then Ombudsman Mr. Justice ® Usman Ali Shah got annoyed and issued a revised finding that the complainant was blackmailing his secretariat and he could take serious note of that. Who was actually blackmailing whom? It was same Usman Ali Shah whom when in the press conference a reporter questioned that does his new car purchased violating the government rules had a tape recorder which was then banned. Usman Ali replied that his car did not had one. After press conference the reporters circled his car peeping through the windows fingering towards the installed tape recorder. Usman Ali Shah shouted on the reporters that he could take contempt notice of it. This senior citizen today might not have update knowledge but perhaps still Syed Usman Ali Shah is the only Pakistani seeking a third staff car. My last information was that his request was lying on the table of Benazir.
TIP OF THE DISCUSSION:
34. A true judicious justice system just on glancing the stamp on “B” of “Pakistan town Bahrain Post Office” on the envelope and seeing minimum 07 days had already occurred would had without any further deliberations
i. declared the act of mal-administration directing investigation
and taken to task international mail office Karachi staff,
ii. in case of envelope “A” with Rs. 00.00 postage paid would had
punished own secretariat staff as well as international mail office Islamabad,
iii. Taken to task the AD(I) asking him to explain if he submitted
wrong that delay complaint rests with Bahrain Post Office or his boss DG was wrong in ordering local investigation of the same complainant.
iv. Is my expecting on my application under any so called international law a Gulf country Kingdom of Bahrain in any way investigate as to how letter starting from Karachi instead of coming to it went to Pakistan Bahrain town and has it any control to investigate who mail and accepted Rs. 00.00 postage paid letter, would show if I had a sound mind?
PS: This senior citizen is almost 75% blind having lost any eye in operation. This is type playing with key board without any pre-draft or post checking hence inconsistency, error of omission and commission expected but fact are true.
06 June 2016
UNDER OUR PAKISTANI DEFINITION
A FAIR PAPER FROM A SENIOR CITIZEN
FOR
STUDENTS STUDY AND ANALYSIS
IN ALL THIS FIND ANY INGREDIENT OF JUSTICE*
(*AS IS DEFINED IN WORLD DICTIONARIES)
The unfortunate nation the past whole fortnight saw how it looked that everyone worth of his last labeled “opposition” was crying loudest possible as if he would take the Prime Minister to task right on the floor of assembly if PM’s answers did not correspond “to-the-point”. Then, as the ordinary expected, the same lot jointly came up in sympathies to the same very PM earlier accused of. Same is the condition of Justice in our beloved homeland. There are ever growing tall and taller claims of justice, free justice, justice at door step, justice at gross route level, reforms in justice process but practical true naked fact always is that likewise the opposition the justice stands up at the end of the day in sympathy and defence of the elite or the culprit. Last month Daily New York Times in an article stated that there were developments like tall high rise in Pakistan but no justice. In our homeland a few years back commoner was made to day dream and was fooled that the judiciary was taking a new birth and that the “Dhartee ho gee Maan kay jaysee”. World Bank money (donation) came for reforms in the ombudsman system (another judicial system) but what factually, really and practically happened? Lawyers fees sky rocketed becoming out of reach of a commoner unless he was earning through some clandestine way and the ombudsman system, in the words of late Justice Nizam just “delivered Decisions” but not “arrived at justice”. A judge’s name appeared in the Panama Leaks but our “justice” till this date is sleeping and hopefully will….
2. Justice, real true justice as is defined in the international dictionaries, there is no doubt, just not merely is drifting rather has almost drifted away from the common man. Today there are claims, tall claims in shape of figures of justice, in shape of statements, press conferences, costly off-set paper bound heavy annual reports, but not the true justice.
PROPER DELIVERY OF NOTICE:
3. Delivery of Notice, universally, is the first and the top most important essential ingredient of a true fair honest justice system. A defective service of Notice in practice is a step to deny justice if not murder the justice; a top scared divine duty. As to defeat the opponent party many tactics are used; like getting frequent adjournments, another such a tactic is “to arrange” defective service of Notice which could lead to ex-parte decision. Once, perhaps two decades back in good times, I saw a Notice from a Gujranwala court to an Overseas Pakistani. His name and the country on the envelope was written in English but building No. area and city in Urdu. It was done knowingly that the envelope containing the Notice may reach the country abroad but the postal authorities there would not be able to read Urdu hence definitely delayed leading to ex-parte decision. An official in a court, in a
tribunal, in a commission, or in any ombudsman office, in enquiry commission who is not aware of or does not recognize this importance and the institution concerned lacking this universal knowledge, to this senior citizen both are incompetent to hold such a scared post. When a court-martialed person can be appointed as MD PIA or an intermediate as Chairman OGRA, posting of such incompetent persons on scared posts, today, brings no surprise at all.
BACKGROUND FACTS:
4. Two such Notices sent one by the Federal Ombudsman Office Islamabad and the other by the Sindh Ombudsman Karachi reached me too late. A formal complaint against the Pakistan Post Office was filed with the Federal Ombudsman. Almost every evening on mini screen one hears, and rightly, that the performance of all the national institutions have deteriorated. No one listens properly to the poor man. We individually almost all have our personal experiences of it. So rightly a question arises, from where comes ever increasing so huge figures of justice delivered and invisible good governance prevailing the nation so frequently is forced to listen to? 28,000 complaints, for example, were lodged with the Federal Ombudsman against electricity companies out of which 25,000 were against inflated billings. If the Federal Ombudsman is providing relief, a million worth question arises then why there is no decrease in complaints against the electricity companies? Companies in such a situation must had ben now afraid of from issuing inflated bills fearing people were approaching the Federal Ombudsman! But are these companies today really afraid of? If they are today afraid of from accountability there should not be any more inflated bills. But if there still are and growing inflated bills complaints then it means there is no relief/justice in practical terms. Facts are before us.
SERVICE OF TWO NOTICES:
5. Two “Notices” one by the Federal Ombudsman Islamabad and the other by the Sindh Ombudsman Karachi were issued. These two Notices had “target fixed dates” for action by the addressee but reached too late. A formal complaint was made against the Pakistan Post from where these Notices started their journey and whose lethargic naked shameful inefficiency caused this delay. The way this complaint was handled super-glued the already cemented belief that the senior Advisor to the Federal Ombudsman dealing with the complainant as investigation officer was not experienced to deal with and, rather, had full sympathy with the nakedly defaulting Pakistan Post (detailed hereunder).
DISPOSAL AND REJECTION OF COMPLAINT
6. The complaint was rejected which in other simple words this complainant was termed wrong and the Pakistan Post Office was, despite a naked self speaking proof lying on the table, absolved of any mal administration encouraging it to keep continue working wrongly as in the two notices in question.
SUMMONED
7. The complaint was that the Pakistan Post neglected its duty which caused delay. Naked, repeat clearly naked, proof was on the table of the dealing Advisor but he summoned this complainant for a hearing in Islamabad which would had cost him Rs. 2 lac approximately. Was there any remotest real need of summoning this complainant in the Hearing?
8. It was most probably late 1980s. I raised a complaint that the Banks were madly “using” private courier service leaving the then most efficient reliable and competitive Pakistan Post “Urgent Mail Service”. I quoted a Government notification according to which the government institutions were required to give an edge to the state-products over the private ones. To my memories in this old age, Mr. Justice Aslam Riaz was the Federal Ombudsman (or A. Salam?) and still true justice existed. He took the complaint seriously. A meeting was scheduled in the demised Pakistan Banking Council attended by all the 5 commercial banks and the Pakistan Post (a director from Islamabad). {Can I file a same or similar complaint today? It would definitely not be entertained on the plea that I was not an aggrieved, ombudsman can only entertain matters of mal administration etc and suggestions).
9. The Federal Ombudsman then on the chair did not summon me for the Hearing in the above case despite the fact it involved presentation as to the basis of my data viz volume of business to the courier and that to the post office - perhaps it was that Justice Aslam Riaz was not that competent enough as compared to today’s most of the senior Advisors in the Federal Ombudsman Office are. Provincial ombudsmen advisors too appear to be incompetent that they don’t summon overseas complainants. Or perhaps, it was because now the present day Ombudsman system stands “reformed” with world bank “donated money” hence Rs. 2 lac of a common man is not that much for today’s ombudsman system-reformed-advisers. And since system was not yet “reformed” then, hence the system headed by Justice Sardar Iqbal/justice Aslam Riaz Hussain and their unreformed-advisers never summoned complainants like me from abroad. Sometime mid 1990s the then Sindh Ombudsman over a cup of tea told me that he did not summon a complainant even from Sanghar let alone from Bahrain knowing what does summoning in practice meant.
10. Though out of context yet for general interest of young students. When I filed above complaint about banks preferring, for certain obvious reasons known to me like thousands of others, the 1972 Bhutto inducted over dozed politics in government department had already started affecting the service. In the meeting scheduled in Pakistan Banking Council, to represent the Pakistan Post Office came to attend Director International Mail slamabad who had nothing whatsoever remotest to do with urgent mail service. Later it transpired he had a marriage to attend so he availed this opportunity of official ticket and TA/DA to cover up the marriage. He did what exactly such influentially backed directors, consultants, advisors usually and mostly do. Since urgent mail service was not his matter or section, he did not had any knowledge at all on it. In the meeting showing totally his worth he submitted that his department was satisfied with the share of business his department was having from the banks. He and his department had in fact not an iota of idea how much business the banking was generating and out of that how much was being diverted towards private couriers and how much to Pakistan Post. Technically this ordinary citizen had afforded an opportunity for the Department to fetch business but since decline had started it was lost through a lethargic representative. The Federal Ombudsman however did not accept this reply of Director International Mail and directed the Bank in the final Finding to desist from mad use of private courier based on my detailed contention.
11. Was there any real remotest whatsoever need of the complainant necessary in the Hearing? A point to ponder for the researchers and law students.
REJECTION:
12. The first Notice (copy envelope attached marked “A”) was desptched by the Federal Ombudsman Secretariat Islamabad for delivery abroad. Every commoner today has the average general knowledge that postage as well as international phone call rates both for local within Pakistan and those for foreign countries are different and higher. If it is not known, perhaps, it is the Federal Ombudsman concerned staff where sits a high ranking Commissioner to deal with Overseas Pakistanis and also an ex-Pakistani Ambassador. While the common man knows that within Pakistan local rates were less and foreign are higher (how much does not matter), the Federal Ombudsman staff perhaps think foreign postage is free i.e Rs. 00.00. The notice was sent under Rs. 00.00 postage paid which in other simple Pakistani ordinary street language means “Bayrang”.
13. The Federal Ombudsman office does not use traditional postage paper-stamps and dropped letters like a common man does in a road side letter box. The office uses franking machine and as per procedure the letters are then by hand handed over at the counter of the post office where franking machine was registered. The post office staff not just proving its professional worth but also showing its more efficiency than the federal ombudsman office staff, accepted this letter with Rs. 00.00 postage affixed and forwarded to the Islamabad International Mail Section where each piece meant for abroad, as per procedure, is supposed invariably individually checked for proper postage paid. The under paid articles here are retained, sent back to the sender with the slip advising to recoup the deficient paid. It further appears this held-up particular envelope started its journey back to the sender through connected delivery-zone-post office but slipped once again without doing the shortfall. The Islamabad International Mail Office proving its practical “professional high diligence” let the envelope fly out. This all process appeared to had consumed a considerable time within Islamabad with the result it ultimately reached to the final destination abroad with considerable delay.
14. The second Notice was posted by the Sindh Ombudsman on 05.01.2015 for delivery in the “Kingdom of Bahrain” in a Persian Gulf country (copy envelope attached marked “B”). The postal staff showing its present day efficiency, perhaps busy in one hand on mobiles with half attention towards the duty rather instead of sending it to International Mail Office sent it to “Bahrain” a small military-operation-affected remote town situate in Swat KP Province. It was received in “Bahrain” (Pakistani town) on 15.01.2015 when the postmaster (Assistant sub-postmaster) forwarded it to Islamabad International Mail Office for sending it to the Kingdom of Bahrain in the Gulf (Post mark stamp clearly visible}. Someone interested in administrative research can ring the
postmaster Bahrain (Swat) who will verify weekly he receives dozens such wrongly directed to him letters which he then re-directs to the correct destination viz Gulf Kingdom of Bahrain. When Sawat/Bahrain Town postmaster returned, the Islamabad International Mail office adding its efficiency sent it, as is apparent from the envelope, to K.S.A (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) totally another country.
POST OFFICE DEFENE:
15. Mr. Hafizur Rehman not other than the ex-Director General Federal Ombudsman Secretariat Islamabad, himself once stated early 1990s that the bureaucracy working in the Ombudsman office had by now shifted their sympathies from the suffering common man to their counterpart brethren bureaucrats sitting in their parent departments. His words have of late proved beyond any reasonable doubt. Similarly as a fortnight back the nation witnessed both ruling and opposition in effect practically hand-in-glove with each other viz slow poison the Panama leaks.
16. Pakistan Post took a defence that delivery of Notices were via a Post Box in the Kingdom of Bahrain hence this delay could be that the complainant collected his mail from the post box late. Post Office further added that as per Universal Postal Union Convention the complainant should had filed a complaint to that effect with the Bahrain Post Office where delay must had occurred. Our senior bureaucrats can “manufacture” a new twist and a new lies without any remotest haste or morality suiting to each new situation. To explain this I can quote more but would restrict to only one self speaking. One Hearing Notice reached me too late and I approached the DG Pakistan Post about this delay. I attach herewith a copy marked “C” the DG directing PMG Karachi and PMG Islamabad directing both of the to investigate “personally” and report back to him (DG Post) “immediately. Reading of this “C” this senior citizen is more than confident would not give AD(I) any shame that while he was telling the Federal Ombudsman that the complaint should under international law be filed with Bahrain delivery post office, yet his chief boss was directing an investigating. The most sorrowful is the senior advisor in the Federal Ombudsman believed him. Remembering his statement before the Ombudsman and seeing “C” I am sure AD(I) would explain that his DG was totally incompetent and ignorant of universal legal position and under his incompetency he order an illegal investigation locally. (I have used the word “shame” here because today it is a parliamentary word last year repeatedly used in the parliament with no objection from the Speaker).
17, Since lies don’t had foundations, the appearing AD(I) proved he was just “manufacturing” a defence. The bureaucrat in the Federal Ombudsman having sympathies with the postal bureaucrat sitting before him and caring more for him, also completely sided and favoured him. Had this investigation officer been truly fair and judicious, which is not a too big wish, he would never had ignored that the complaint was not against late delivery rather the complainant had raised the issue before the Ombudsman that the Department did not give any response to his reminders for providing him a copy of the Investigation report earlier ordered by the DG Pakistan Post. For the students of law and researchers it may be important here that the then Federal Ombudsman and the then Chief Justice SHC jointly stated that “non response by the government functionaries was the mother cause of public frustration”. The investigation officer in the Federal Ombudsman very conveniently playing on the defence of Pakistan Post targeted only the “delay” but “not the non response” termed the mother cause by his own Chief viz the Federal Ombudsman.
18. As I said our bureaucrats manufacture and twist to each new situation similarly as Fawad Chaudhary Advocate who was yesterday evening was not tired of counting achievements of General Pervaiz Musharraf, the very next morning the General was out of chair, listening same Fawad in favour of PPP was marvelous. While AD(I) was saying under universal law investigation should be done by Bahrain Post, I attach as “E” a letter from the Department of AD(I), Asstt. Dy. Director General (QS) [senior to AD(I)] while conveying that “investigation has been done” which under AD(I) argument should not had been, was manufacturing a new defence that under universal law no “claim” can be made. The fact is I had never made any claim viz any compensation etc. Here the ADD (QS) like the bureaucratic tribe did not feel any hesitation that there was an envelope lying on her table showing Pakistani two stamp stamp and Rs. 00.00 postage page.
19. The Senior Advisor Ombudsman Secretariat in the eyes of this senior citizen since lacked the basic practical knowledge of postal system or secondarily due to inherited sympathies for the postal bureaucrat sitting before him, completely ignored the harsh truths lying on his table in shape of Photostats of two envelopes and fully sympathized and agreed to this contention of the defaulting post office.
20. The Final Decision on my complaint was issued on 01 Dec 2015 but this senior citizen holding practically Holy Quran in my hand can affirm on solemn affirmation that he has till today not received his that copy of the Decision under the procedure post mailed to me as per the system. May be due to similar efficiency same went to Bahrain Town in Sawat and from there Saudi Arabia. It shows how dependent is our international mail office. I got an email copy of the same 19 May 2016, on my request, thanks for the kind attention of Assistant Registrar Federal Ombudsman Secretariat.
STUDY TIPS FOR STUDENTS OF LAW
21. For the students of Law this senior citizen affectionately wishes to put the following valuable completely relevant points which might help them not just in study of law but also in true dispensation and delivery of justice in their future life as a Judge, a Lawyer or posting in the ever expanding ombudsman system.
POSTAL KNOWLEDGE:
22. Though unnecessary and unrelated yet a note here. This senior citizen himself or none of his family member during the last 50-60 years is known to have ever worked in the post office. However, when in 1980s I filed one or two complaints against Pakistan Post Office one quoted above, the then Federal Ombudsman in his Final Decision wrote “the complainant had filed the complaint against his own ex Department”. He took me as an employee of the Department noting the appreciable knowledge I expressed pleading my complaints. A person who deals with a subject, is rightly supposed first to apprise himself with the basic knowledge relating to that. For example Raza Rabbani is asked to investigate Panama Leaks, it is not expecting too much from him that before touching the file he apprised himself a little what were the offshore companies, who how why and for what purpose these are established.
UNIVERSAL DOCTRINE NOT KNOWN
IN OUR TODAY’s OMBUDSMAN SYSTEM
23. All the law students know well that dealing with justice related issues, the very first invariable evaluation universally made and exercised is to see WHEN, WHY and WHERE the cause of complaint arose. All subsequent developments taking place later are given secondary attention or importance. An example to understand. The whole ombudsman system started its journey toward deterioration 1993-1995. Till before, the system as a whole was really working according to the international standards and norms. Sindh Home Department on my written by post-mailed letter-type-request granted approval for issuance of an arms licence to me. Accordingly, then, I filled up the prescribed Arms Licence Application Form, affixed fee in shape of stamps and deposited the application in the prescribed way. A receipt was issued asking me to collect the Licence after two weeks. Before that date, Sindh Government banned issuance of new Licences. Licence to me was stopped. The then Sindh Ombudsman, not a Judge but God blessed with quality of doing justice (Mr. S.M. Munir, a bureaucrat) refused to accept this stand of the Home Department. He observed that the Home Department had already granted approval based on the applicant’s credentials when there was no ban. It was now only a normal formality of issuance of an Arms Licence Booklet. The ban, he declared, under the universal principle thus did not apply on this case. This is what today almost majority of advisors, senior advisors or ombudsmen unfortunately today do not know.
24. The senior advisor detailed on national expense to deal with sacred justice not just apparently lacking knowledge of above universal doctrine but also Hafizur Rehman’s worded sympathies with the post office bureaucrat, kept his eyes away from the two copies of envelopes lying on his table. Had he any knowledge of the justice system, by just a normal glance on envelope “B” he would had nakedly seen that the envelope “B” started its journey on 05 Jan 2015 instead going towards West on the other side of the sea moved on the opposite direction East landing in Sawat/Bahrain.
23. It landed on 15 Jan 2015 in Pakistani Bahrain, 07 days after starting its journey. Thus visible to every sane soul that the damage viz first 07 days delay had already occurred within Pakistan which under the universal doctrine “cause of complaint arisen and damage occurred”. Not judicious and not fair senior advisor discussed the issue only aftermaths of the damage as the post office wished.
25. The senior advisor did not raise the million worth question as to how a letter for foreign delivery started its journey with Rs. 00.00 postage paid? A judicious and fair advisor would had in the larger interest of justice system as well as for the future good of his own Secretariat taken the issue more serious and taken to task the staff concerned in his own office. But completely ignoring and side tracking it, he saved his own office staff on the cost of good reputation of the Secretariat.
26. The senior advisor I am sure did not know that that though his staff paid Rs. 00.00 postage, the international mail office Islamabad showing its criminal negligence passed it forward, the postal department senior management killed the matter yet the Pakistani nation suffered a financial loss; viz that this nation would pay to the Bahrain postal department appropriate sum on this envelope under the universal postal convention. Causing of any financial loss may that be just a Paisa due to negligence at any level is an act of mal administration punishable and recoverable.
UNDER INTERNATIONA LAW
27. The AD (I) Pakistan Post in order to prove this complainant wrong, took the argument that under the Universal Postal Union procedure to which Pakistan was a signatory, this complaint should had been filed with Bahrain Postal Authorities and the Senior Advisor being himself a bureaucrat just in routine sympathy with another bureaucrat sitting before him but also due to his own ignorance accepted this argument. Pakistan Post Office wanted to say why this delay could not be at Bahrain end and not in Pakistan.
28. The above argument that delay could be at Bahrain end and the complaint should had been complained there, in principle holds good but since this senior citizen is not that wise and capable as that those two bureaucrats, he did not do this because he loved his motherland Pakistan and could not think of shaming the motherland sitting in a foreign land as was the AD(I) suggested to do.
29. I could had been most shameless had I done what AD(I) suggested despite knowing one letter was posted under Rs. 00.00. I am sure the Senior Advisor despite the fact envelope copy lying on his table had not raised the question “is accepting and forwarding letter under Rs. 00.00 under international universal postal union rule”? This senior citizen since is not that fully blind as AD(I) Pakistan Post might have thought, hence seeing nakedly prominent that letter posted on 05 Jan 2015 from Karachi travelled to West rather than East and first landed in a Swat Town Bahrain on 15 Jan 2015 then with what shameless face I could had asked the Bahrain Post that delay was on their part.
ORDINARY LETTER – CAN’T BE
PROVED WHEN DELIVERED
30. Pakistan Post argued that the complainant’s address was that of a post box hence no one can ascertain when he actually collected the mail from his post box after delivery. It is, in principle, quite a sound argument but holds no good in presence of two envelopes one having Rs. 00.00 postage but more specifically showing the sheer negligence that that travelled towards East rather than West and 07 days it consumed reaching to a wrong destination (Bahrain town in Swat). A money taken as bribe from the very first step remains “haram” despite later regularly annually paying tax, zakat and declaring in returns.
EVEN IF A PROOF EXISTED?
31. Pakistan Post Office argues and Senior Advisor, himself a bureaucrat in the words of Hafizur Rehman feeling sympathy for the postal bureaucrat accepts this argument. No doubt there is never a proof of actual date of delivery of an ordinary letter but what value such a proof has, say in the eyes of our ombudsman system, has there been such a proof existing?
32. A friend of mine made a complaint against a Bank in Karachi. The Ombudsman office sent Bank’s reply to the complainant for his rejoinder. The Ombudsman issued his Final Decision that since the complainant did not respond hence the case was closed. The complaint knowing well that the matter under the procedure needed to be taken with Bahrain Post did that. He received through proper channel a photo-copy of the Delivery Slip. In Pakistan when a postman is handed over a Registered Letter for delivery, he is also handed over a small slip containing registered number, name of post office article booked, addressee’s address, a date stamp showing date handed over to the postman. In the evening the postman returns that Delivery Slip containing signature of the recipient, date (and office stamp if addressee is an office). This copy of Delivery Receipt showed the signature and name of person who received it in ombudsman office with date of receipt. It showed the complainant’s rejoinder quoted in the Final Closing Order as having not been received, was in effect properly received in the Ombudsman Office complete 06 days before the decision was written.
33. The complainant submitting a copy of this Certificate of Delivery prayed that serious investigation to this serious matter be conducted that where went a week long ago received complainant’s rejoinder, who was responsible for this sheer negligence which deprived the complainant from justice. Instead of having any remotest feeling about the guilt of his own Secretariat, the then Ombudsman Mr. Justice ® Usman Ali Shah got annoyed and issued a revised finding that the complainant was blackmailing his secretariat and he could take serious note of that. Who was actually blackmailing whom? It was same Usman Ali Shah whom when in the press conference a reporter questioned that does his new car purchased violating the government rules had a tape recorder which was then banned. Usman Ali replied that his car did not had one. After press conference the reporters circled his car peeping through the windows fingering towards the installed tape recorder. Usman Ali Shah shouted on the reporters that he could take contempt notice of it. This senior citizen today might not have update knowledge but perhaps still Syed Usman Ali Shah is the only Pakistani seeking a third staff car. My last information was that his request was lying on the table of Benazir.
TIP OF THE DISCUSSION:
34. A true judicious justice system just on glancing the stamp on “B” of “Pakistan town Bahrain Post Office” on the envelope and seeing minimum 07 days had already occurred would had without any further deliberations
i. declared the act of mal-administration directing investigation
and taken to task international mail office Karachi staff,
ii. in case of envelope “A” with Rs. 00.00 postage paid would had
punished own secretariat staff as well as international mail office Islamabad,
iii. Taken to task the AD(I) asking him to explain if he submitted
wrong that delay complaint rests with Bahrain Post Office or his boss DG was wrong in ordering local investigation of the same complainant.
iv. Is my expecting on my application under any so called international law a Gulf country Kingdom of Bahrain in any way investigate as to how letter starting from Karachi instead of coming to it went to Pakistan Bahrain town and has it any control to investigate who mail and accepted Rs. 00.00 postage paid letter, would show if I had a sound mind?
PS: This senior citizen is almost 75% blind having lost any eye in operation. This is type playing with key board without any pre-draft or post checking hence inconsistency, error of omission and commission expected but fact are true.
06 June 2016
