Impeachment

[Interceptor]

He will be around. He is on Geo (when was Geo ever pro-Musharraf)?

Also there are quite a few things in his article that require some introspection. You can't just dismiss everything claiming Quraishi is a "paid" character..if so where is the proof?

Ansar Abasi comes to mind. Then again Geo came on line through Musharraf's blessings.


Btw who pays for his inconvenience to write and who funds his site, he is funded character, I am sure a journalist does not turn millionaire from his job.

 

[arsipk]

guys i have one realy simple studpid question, but can someone tell me whats NRO.

 

[Interceptor]

guys i have one realy simple studpid question, but can someone tell me whats NRO.

National Reconciliation Ordinance

1. Short title and commencement.
(1) This Ordinance may be called the National Reconciliation Ordinance, 2007.

(2) It shall come into force at once.


2. Amendment of section 494, Act V of 1898.
In the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898), section 494 shall be renumbered as sub-section (1) thereof and after sub-section (1) renumbered as aforesaid, the following sub-section (2) and (3) shall be added, namely:-
(2) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sub-section(1), the Federal Government or a Provincial Government may, before the judgment is pronounced by a trial court, withdraw from the prosecution of any person including an absconding accused who is found to be falsely involved for political reasons or through political victimization in any case initiated between 1st day of January, 1986 to 12th day of October, 1999 and upon such withdrawal clause (a) and clause (b) of sub-section (1) shall apply.

(3) For the purposes of exercise of powers under sub-section (2) the Federal Government and the Provincial Government may each constitute a Review Board to review the entire record of the case and furnish recommendations as to their withdrawal or otherwise.

(4) The Review Board in case of Federal Government shall be headed by a retired judge of the Supreme Court with Attorney-General and Federal Law Secretary as its members and in case of Provincial Government it shall be headed by a retired judge of the High Court with Advocate-General and/or Prosecutor-General and Provincial Law Secretary as its members.

(5) A review Board undertaking review of a case may direct the Public Prosecutor or any other concerned authority to furnish to it the record of the case.


3. Amendment of section 39, Act LXXXV of 1976.
(1) In the Representation of the People Act, 1976 (LXXXV of 1976), in section 39, after sub-section (6), the following new sub-section (7) shall be added, namely:-
(7) After consolidation of results the Returning Officer shall give to such contesting candidates and their election agents as are present during the consolidation proceedings, a copy of the result of the count notified to the Commission immediately against proper receipt and shall also post a copy thereof to the other candidates and election agents.


4. Amendment of section 18, Ordinance XVIII of 1999.
In the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (XVIII of 1999), hereinafter referred to as the said Ordinance, in section 18, in clause (e), for the full stop at the end a colon shall be substituted and thereafter the following proviso shall be added, namely:-
Provided that no sitting member of Parliament or a Provincial Assembly shall be arrested without taking into consideration the recommendations of the Special Parliamentary Committee on Ethics referred to in clause (aa) or Special Committee of the Provincial Assembly on Ethics referred to in clause (aaa) of section 24, respectively.

5. Amendment of section 24, Ordinance XVIII of 1999.
In the said ordinance, in section 24,- (i) in clause (a) for the full stop at the end a colon shall be substituted and thereafter the following proviso shall be inserted, namely.-
Provided that no sitting member of Parliament or a Provincial Assembly shall be arrested without taking into consideration the recommendations of Special Parliamentary Committee on Ethics or Special Committee of the Provincial Assembly on Ethics referred to in clause (aa) and (aaa), respectively, before which the entire material and evidence shall be placed by the chairman, NAB.
; and
(ii) after clause (a), amended as aforesaid, the following new clauses (aa) and (aaa) shall be inserted, namely;-
(aa) The Special Parliamentary Committee on Ethics referred to in the proviso to clause (a) above shall consist of a chairman who shall be a member of either House of Parliament and eight members each from the National Assembly and Senate to be selected by the Speaker, National Assembly and Chairman Senate, respectively, on the recommendations of Leader of the House and Leader of the Opposition of their respective Houses, with equal representation from both sides.

(aaa) The Special Committee of the provincial Assembly on Ethics shall consist of a Chairman and eight members to be selected by the Speaker of the Provincial Assembly on the recommendation of Leader of the House and Leader of the Opposition, with equal representation from both sides.



6. Amendment of section 31A, Ordinance XVIII of 1999.
In the said Ordinance, in section 31A, in clause (a), for the full stop at the end a colon shall be substituted and thereafter the following new clause (aa) shall be inserted, namely:-
(aa) An order or judgment passed by the Court in absentia against an accused is void ab initio and shall not be acted upon.


7. Insertion of new section, Ordinance, XVIII of 1999.
In the said Ordinance, after section 33, the following new section shall be inserted, namely:-
33A. Withdrawal and termination of prolonged pending proceedings initiated prior to 12th October, 1999.
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Ordinance or any other law for the time being in force, proceedings under investigation or pending in any court including a High Court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan initiated by or on a reference by the National Accountability Bureau inside or outside Pakistan including proceedings continued under section 33, requests for mutual assistance and civil party to proceedings initiated by the Federal Government before the 12th day of October, 1999 against holders of public office stand withdrawn and terminated with immediate effect and such holders of public office shall also not be liable to any action in future as well under this Ordinance for acts having been done in good faith before the said date;
Provided that those proceedings shall not be withdrawn and terminated which relate to cases registered in connection with the cooperative societies and other financial and investment companies or in which no appeal, revision or constitutional petition has been filed against final judgment and order of the Court or in which an appellate or revisional order or an order in constitutional petition has become final or in which voluntary return or plea bargain has been accepted by the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau under section 25 or recommendations of the Conciliation Committee have been accepted by the Governor, State bank of Pakistan under section 25A.

(2) No action or claim by way of suit, prosecution, complaint or other civil or criminal proceeding shall lie against the Federal, Provincial or Local Government, the National Accountability Bureau or any of their officers and functionaries for any act or thing done or intended to be done in good faith pursuant to the withdrawal and termination of cases under sub-section (1) unless they have deliberately misused authority in violation of law.

NATIONAL RECONCILIATION ORDINANCE

 

[Skywalker]

Ahmed Quarishi, not credible he is paid character, but after the ousting of Musharraf we wont hear of his malice again.

May I ask you how credible Mr. 10% is???

 

[blain2]

So much for Hamid Mir's typical BS rants about Musharraf:

US wants ‘honourable’ stay for president in Pakistan


By Anwar Iqbal

WASHINGTON, Aug 10: The United States does not want to interfere in the impeachment process but should President Pervez Musharraf agree to step down, the Americans would like to ensure a secure and honourable stay for him in Pakistan.

Diplomatic and US official sources, when contacted by Dawn, said that US Ambassador Anne Patterson had left for Islamabad on Saturday after consulting senior White House and State Department officials on this issue.

She came to Washington in the last week of July to be present here during Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani’s visit to the US capital but stayed back for further consultations on the ruling coalition’s decision to impeach President Musharraf.Although the coalition announced the impeachment move after the prime minister had returned to Islamabad, diplomatic sources in Washington say that the Gilani government had consulted both the Americans and the army before making the move.

According to these sources, the Americans told the Pakistanis that they want to stay neutral on this issue and would support any move which was “consistent with the rule of law and the Constitution,” as the State Department spokesman Gonzalo R. Gallegos said at a recent briefing.

The cleverly crafted statement maintains America’s neutrality because while the Constitution allows impeachment, it also permits the president to undo the current political set-up.

The Americans further emphasised their neutrality when approached by the Pakistani government to use its influence to persuade President Musharraf to step down.

The Pakistani government wanted a senior US official or a lawmaker to call President Musharraf and urge him to quit.

They reminded the Americans that they had used a similar approach against Philippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos in 1986 when senior US officials and lawmakers publicly urged him to step down.

But diplomatic sources say that the Americans are refusing to make any public statement for or against President Musharraf and instead want Pakistani politicians to tackle this issue without outside support.

They, however, appear willing to use their influence to arrange for a secure and honourable stay for President Musharraf in Pakistan should he agree to quit, the sources said.

A British media report -- re-published in American newspapers -- claims that President Musharraf is seriously considering a proposal to step down.

US officials, when contacted by Dawn, refused to confirm or deny this report but other sources said that “President Musharraf has made it clear that he has no plans to leave Pakistan, whether he stays in power or not.”

And, according to diplomatic sources, this is where the Americans are willing to help.

“They have apparently agreed to help assure a secure and honourable stay for him in Pakistan,” said one such source. “They also want to ensure that the president should be given full indemnity should he agree to step down.”

The source added: “This is more or less what the Pakistan army also wants.”

Meanwhile, senior Pakistani diplomats are scheduled to hold further talks with US officials on the issue on Monday when President George W. Bush returns to Washington after a week-long tour of several Asian countries.

Diplomatic sources say that the Pakistani government may directly appeal to President Bush to help defuse the current political crisis.

The Americans also fear that a power struggle between pro-and anti-Musharraf forces could push nuclear-armed Pakistan into a protracted turmoil; prevent its shaky civilian government from moving against militants hiding in Fata; and even jeopardise vital US supply lines through Pakistan to Afghanistan.

“There are elements within the US administration who would be very nervous about Musharraf leaving the scene, as they think the civilians are not in control of the army and ISI,” says Lisa Curtis, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

But it is also apparent that the Americans are not willing to take any public position on this issue. At least not yet.

US wants ‘honourable’ stay for president in Pakistan -DAWN - Top Stories; August 11, 2008

 

[blain2]

Another report debunking that sorry excuse for a journalist Hamid Mir's expose about Musharraf being put on the ECL, this time by PPP-run ministry of Interior:

No ECL move against Musharraf



By Our Staff Reporter


ISLAMABAD, Aug 10: A senior official of the interior ministry said on Sunday that the government had no intention to put the name of President Pervez Musharraf on the exit control list. He said the interior ministry had not received any instructions to stop the president from going abroad.

Dawn

******

I was referring to this masterpiece by that ignoramus in this post and the one above:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/182492-post130.html

 

[Neo]

Pak’s ‘Aam Admi’ feels Impeachment Motion may drift nation towards uncertainty​

Karachi, Aug 8: The ‘Aam Admi’ in Pakistan seems to be worried and keeping his fingers crossed ahead of the Monday’s Impeachment Motion to be moved by the four-party coalition government in Islamabad. The political development has evoked a mixed reaction from among Pakistanis, with most of them having the opinion that the country might be pushed to yet another era of political uncertainty.

One Ahmed Khan (70) was of the view that the removal of the President will create “further anarchy in the country”, as, he added, a number of senior politicians who have no role in the current set-up will use the situation to their advantage. “Benazir Bhutto was the only real leader and she was killed to pave the way for conspirators. She had the courage to boldly face her enemies and the present PPP government is nothing without her,” he said, reiterating that the current political scenario was not right for taking any initiatives against the president.

Naseem, a factory worker, advised the nation to seek the Almighty’s blessings, stating that he had lost all hope in politicians. “Everyone is doing what they deem fit and are completely ignoring the masses that elected them in the first place. These politicians are just interested in filling up their bank accounts with dollars and pounds,” he said.

Mudassir, an employee of a local bank, said: “The political parties need to unite, as the public is looking to them to resolve issues such as the political instability and rapid inflation. These problems have to be addressed as they are making life miserable for the middle and lower classes.”

Arif alias Kallu was happy that the leaders had agreed to impeach President Musharraf, who, according to him, was the root of all the problems facing the nation. However, he was quick to point out that the impeachment would not necessarily lead to better conditions. “The government needs to focus on the law and order situation, especially in the tribal areas, where hundreds of schools have been burnt and dozens of innocent citizens are being killed everyday,” he said.

A shopkeeper, Muhammad Akram, said that the impeachment decision was one favored by a majority of the population. “If the intentions of politicians are right, they can bring prosperity to the country,” he said.

Ghafoor Masih, a daily wager worker, said that over the past five months the federal government had failed to deliver and had only created problems for the common man. “Rather than making announcements of impeaching the president, the government should consider the plight of the public, which is bearing the brunt of the inflation and other problems,” he said. (ANI)

Pak’s ‘Aam Admi’ feels Impeachment Motion may drift nation towards uncertainty | Top News

 

[Neo]

If Pakistan is a democracy why is the "Aam Admi" worried about the Impeachment? Isn't a democracy powered by the comon man?

 

[Neo]

Pak constitutional experts differ on SC''s role in Musharraf''s impeachment​

Islamabad: While an announcement has been made by Pakistan''s ruling coalition to go ahead with the impeachment of President Pervez Musharraf, top constitutional experts in the country have differed on what the country''s Supreme Court can or cannot do with regard to the motion. But most of them said that the apex court has no jurisdiction in the matter.

The Daily Times quoted S M Zafar, a lawyer, as saying that the Supreme Court would not interfere in the parliament''s affairs in usual circumstances but could stay an impeachment motion against the president.

He further went on to say that the apex court could take up the issue if allegations in the charge sheet against the president warrant its attention. It could issue an interim injunction to stay the impeachment process ahead of the motion, he said, adding that the president could then plea the charge sheet against him is unjustified.

Justice (retired) Fakhruddin G Ebrahim, however, said it was the right of the parliament to impeach the president under Article 47 of the Constitution, and that the Supreme Court did not have the constitutional authority to interfere with the impeachment process.

Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Secretary Muhammad Amin Javed said the Supreme Court could neither stay the process of impeachment nor entertain any challenge to the motion, because "it is being moved by the representatives of the 160 million people of Pakistan".

Veteran lawyer Latif Khosa said the Supreme Court could not interfere with the impeachment motion.

Former SCBA president Hamid Khan said the parliament was supreme and the Supreme Court had no mandate or jurisdiction to interfere with its affairs. He alleged that the incumbent Supreme Court judges were "handpicked by Musharraf", and could therefore do anything.

Justice (retired) Tariq Mehmood said the Constitution did not authorize the Supreme Court to entertain a petition against the president''s impeachment. (ANI

Pak constitutional experts differ on SC''s role in Musharraf''s impeachment | Top News

 

[Interceptor]

Pak’s ‘Aam Admi’ feels Impeachment Motion may drift nation towards uncertainty​

Pak’s ‘Aam Admi’ feels Impeachment Motion may drift nation towards uncertainty | Top News

Neo that may be one set of opinions, however, there were reports and they even telecasted it, people distrobuting sweets among each other after the news of impeachment.

Musharraf has lived his days as he wanted for nearly a decade, one must consider that and take that in note, he was not elected member of Pakistan, and now he is creating blockades for the Coalition government, his name shames the Pak army as it assosiats him to them.

I dont press on how many blunders and how many lives it costed Pakistan to come to so far to Democracy, he is an "relic of the past" and must be removed if there is to be stability in Baluchistan and NWFP, that what the elected of that region want.

 

[Interceptor]

If Pakistan is a democracy why is the "Aam Admi" worried about the Impeachment? Isn't a democracy powered by the comon man?

The common man has elected those who oppose Musharraf in large quantities, so I see that the common man is accord to the decision, if Musharraf has supporters than where is his street power?

His support comes of the US and from the establishment. That is what most of the news agencies have cited, and now that the US and the Army both have backed away from supporting him, he is alone wondering how he will escape this.

 

[Neo]

The common man has elected those who oppose Musharraf in large quantities, so I see that the common man is accord to the decision, if Musharraf has supporters than where is his street power?

And they're starting to realise the mistake. What have the leaders done for the comon man in past six months except to bring more instability and impoverishment?

His support comes of the US and from the establishment. That is what most of the news agencies have cited, and now that the US and the Army both have backed away from supporting him, he is alone wondering how he will escape this.

PPP's now is uncle little doggy, not Musharraf.

 

[Interceptor]

And they're starting to realise the mistake. What have the leaders done for the comon man in past six months except to bring more instability and impoverishment?

Well Neo I will rephrase it for you again, the People of Pakistan voted against Musharraf which one sees, and the PML-Q the Kings Party the Pro Musharraf party it to received votes in some ways, however, look what unfolded in the Punjab Assembly these Pro Musharraf clan voted for Impeachment, the motion of that Musharraf should take a fresh vote of confidence, the Q-clan has 80 seats in PA and only 25 voted against the motion that translates as 31% voted against the motion nearly 70% voted against Musharraf this is of the Q-league, now Neo who made these people change their mind? The impeachment of Musharraf is historical and you can quote me on that, the for and against must not be uttered as the one who support this party or the other, you must look at it from this view that what ever is to unfold it would only be a vote for Democracy or a relic of the past simple as that.

PPP's now is uncle little doggy, not Musharraf.

If we look at the track record of the PPP, it will tell you that the PPP in the past has very rough relations with US, and you are just deceiving yourself, Musharraf has been their poodle has been there "most allied ally" has been "Washington's top guy" there is no hiding this fact.

 

[fatman17]

US reimbursements to pakistan allow for NO slush funds.
10-step multi-tiered system put in place by US and pak govts to process CSF transactions.
source: daily times
so much for this accusation by zardari!

 

[dr.umer]

Bid to Impeach Pakistan's Musharraf May Be Uphill Battle



By Gary Thomas
Washington
11 August 2008
Voice of America

Pakistan's civilian government says it wants to impeach President Pervez Musharraf. Why the government feels the need to move now is not clear. As VOA Correspondent Gary Thomas reports, the former military ruler was already sidelined politically following elections earlier this year.

There is little question that a majority of Pakistanis want to see President Musharraf gone. His party was soundly trounced by an opposition coalition in the February parliamentary elections. A just-released poll of Pakistani voters by the U.S.-based International Republican Institute shows 83 percent of the respondents said they would like the new government to remove him.

But the bid to impeach the president raises two seemingly contradictory questions. What took the coalition government so long to make what would appear to be a popular political decision? On the flip side, why move against a president who is, for all intents and purposes, is effectively devoid of power?

The coalition has been divided by arguments about not only what to do about President Musharraf, but what to do about the judges he fired last year, precipitating a political crisis.

Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, whose party is the junior partner in the governing coalition, has consistently and repeatedly called for President Musharraf to step down or be removed, and for the judges to be restored.

But Christine Fair of the RAND Corporation says the Pakistan Peoples' Party, the senior partner, has been more willing to cut deals with the president, particularly because such bargaining won an effective legal immunity for party leader Asif Zardari, the husband of the late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated during the election campaign. Zadari has been accused of corruption. He has repeatedly denied any misconduct.

"The very things that got it [the PPP] and also Nawaz Sharif so many votes are the very things that it is disincentivized from moving on," Fair said. "It does not want to restore the judges. It really does not want to impeach Musharraf because it made deals with Musharraf. And the National Reconciliation Order, of course, is the basis that absolves Zardari from so much from the alleged, and probably likely, wrongdoing."

Teresita Schaffer, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for South Asia, says it is very likely that Sharif's patience wore out, and he threatened to pull out of the ruling coalition, unless his demand for impeachment was met. But, she adds, another power-sharing deal might have been worked out.

"If there were a deal in which Zardari got to be president and Nawaz got to be prime minister again, how would that work? You know, on one level, it sounds like the basis for a concordat," she said. "At another level, it sounds like a nightmare."

President Musharraf could preemptively resign. As president, he also retains the power to dismiss the parliament. But most analysts believe that would be a huge misstep that would only accelerate his impeachment.

The wild card remains the military. Then-General Musharraf took power from Nawaz Sharif in a coup in 1999, and, until late last year, he was both president and head of the army.

The RAND Corporation's Christine Fair says the army is not too fond of him for his more controversial actions, but it also wants to avoid any messy proceedings that could smear the army's reputation.

"The army is in kind of a pickle. It does not want to defend Musharraf," she said. "But it also does not want its institutional equity to be drug [dragged] through the mud, when it is already down and out. So, I seriously doubt that they are [the government] going to get the numbers for an impeachment, and I think that that is probably going to be communicated to them [the government] one way or the other. And I think the army is going to be pretty active in subverting an impeachment."

With the re-emergence of civilian government, the military has pointedly said it wants to get out of politics. Teresita Schaffer, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says an impeachment could force the army and the onetime general back into each other's arms.

"I have felt for some time that the army did not want to stick its neck out any more on Musharraf's behalf," she said. "And, of course, Musharraf does not control the instruments of government. He cannot snap his fingers and have 2,000 people arrested like he used to be able to. At what point, and with what combination of provocations, have things reached a point where the military leadership will say, 'You know what, this is not working, we are going to have to go back to our old way of doing things."

A successful impeachment requires a two-thirds vote of both the lower house National Assembly and the upper chamber, the Senate.