Search results

Khawaja Haris, the counsel representing NS, has submitted a photocopy of passport from the nomination papers of NS which he filed with ECP in 2013. The copy shows UAE Iqama; plea taken before SC is that NS did not hide his Iqama and the claim made by JIT that NS hid his Iqama is false. In other...

Publicly? Don't tell me you think Justice Ejaz will go to constitutional avenue to announce legal status of CMA. We'll come to know by all means, petitioners and media are proactive.

Yes there's a huge difference. Registrar is supposed to accept everything which fulfills requirements, it's only the judge who decides admissibility. Hundreds of cases are accepted by registrar but are rejected by the judge later on. Tomorrow this CMA will be referred to head of the bench and...

http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/C.A._532_2015.pdf Rai Hassan Nawaz appeal. You mean registrar office accepted the CMA? I am not sure! Maybe docs are same.

Seriously? Which article allows supreme court to entertain pending petitions which per se belong in ECP? Which article of the constitution allowed SC to constitute JIT? Which article of the constitution allows SC to allow time barred appeals? Which article of the constitution allows SC to turn...

Yes! JIT was provided with all the record, same is true for PTI.

Obviously the judgement has to be based on 63(1)(1), for it was the article which was invoked. That's the interpretation of the 63(1)(1), otherwise there's no direct constitutional bar on dual national. Exactly what I said earlier, it was SC which interpreted law. As for SC's inability to...

You're not getting. Statement that one who ceases to be a Pakistani is at par with statement that one who acquires a citizenship of a foreign state. In both the statements the person is not a Pakistani anymore whereas the dual national is a foreign national as well as a Pakistani national. Spot...

It says who ceases to be a Pakistani it doesn't say about dual national, a dual national is still a Pakistani. Want to read a long judgement of Justice Chaudhry?

There's no constitutional bar on dual national to run for elections in Pakistan yet SC ruled dual national can't run for elections in Pakistan.Constitution if doesn't bar PM to do a job abroad then it doesn't allow either, that said it's a constitutional matter especially when considered in...

Exactly what I am saying, SC should pass a ruling on this constitutional issue. Mere excuse ke qanoon ke mutabiq ain't gonna work.

It's only the SC which can decide, interpretation of law is a right exclusively reserved by SC. Reference, ruling on dual nationality. Kya kanoon? Is there any law which permits a PM to do a job that too abroad?

There's another constitutional factor which should be taken into account, two jobs simultaneously. SC has to rule on conflict of interest. Let people know if it's fine for a PM to do a job abroad.

I would recommend you to read two judgement of justice Umar Ata Bandial, I'll share if I get a soft copy.

Arguendo he declared his iqama, now did he declare benefit he would get? I mean did he declare those 10000 AED? And what would you make of undeclared bank accounts? If NS manages to get away with all this then truly he's a son of a greater god and has every right to rule Pakistan and make...

Submitting a passport copy is declaration? There's a a separate section in nomination papers called statement of assets and liabilities, it shows zilch. Form 21 which has to be filed by every MNA shows nothing. Besides it was never about Iqama, it was about salary.

Challenging a fact does not necessarily mean the fact is not true, it's the court which decides what is true.

No, nothing has been declared, neither the source nor the income. Source that does not generate any income shouldn't be a source in first place, logic 101. It's the income which matters, you can't justify income without a source, so definitely both.

Trial court mein constitutional matters entertain nahi hotay. This case will definitely go to a trial court, there's no doubt about it. We're talking about disqualification under article 62/63 which obviously can't be decided by a trial court.

Every source of income has to be declared.