Pakistan President sacks chief justice

[Lahori paa jee]

High-level changes imminent

The 'mishandling' of judicial crisis is about to take its toll as important high-level changes are imminent.

The consultations on the highest level will take place here Saturday. President Gen Pervez Musharraf will consult his colleagues and political buddies here.

Former prime minister and President of the ruling PML Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, who has become active after returning from the United States, left for Lahore on Friday and was expected to return to Islamabad today. Shujaat has been tipped to assume some important assignment. Chief Minister Punjab Chaudhry Pervez Elahi is also reaching Islamabad on Saturday morning.

Highly placed political sources told The News that Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz who met President Musharraf twice in two days, will travel with the president today for laying foundation stone of the country's largest airport and afterwards they will address a public meeting at Taxila to be held under the auspices of the PML and the local administration.

It is expected the president will drop important hints about the political future of the present dispensation, and some important announcements may be made on the occasion.

Governor Punjab Lt-Gen Khalid Maqbool has returned from Dubai after having some significant contacts. He will be in Islamabad today and meet Musharraf. The sources implied that Maqbool has assumed the role of new interlocutor of the president. The former interlocutor has been asked to look after international assignments with more vigour.

Meanwhile, the prime minister has curtailed his engagements and is engaged in consultations with his close friends.

Sources close to him are insisting that the ongoing activities are normal political exercise, as the country is heading towards the election, and such 'gimmicks' are popular political tricks for catching the attention of the people and quarters calling the shot.

No agenda has yet been distributed among the members of the federal cabinet, which will be in session on Wednesday next.

Political observers are of the view that a big decision may emerge out of the developments taking place on various counts. In such eventuality 'non-political' faces may be brought in dealing with the affairs. The 'activities' in Dubai are supposed to determine the future course of action, they opined.

Link

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Amended charges against seven officers in CJ manhandling case

A three-member Supreme Court bench Wednesday issued amended charges under Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003 against all seven officers in the case of alleged manhandling of Justice Iftikahr Muhammad Chaudhry.

The previous charges were framed on April 4 under the Contempt of Court Act 1976, which Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan told the court had become redundant after the promulgation of the 2003 ordinance.

Accepting arguments submitted by the Attorney General, the bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Rana Bhagwandas, Justice Tassaddaque Hussain Jillani and Justice Nasirul Mulk, issued amended charges against the officers.

The seven officers facing the charges are Chief Commissioner Islamabad Khalid Pervez, Inspector General of Police Islamabad Chaudhry Iftikhar Ahmed, Deputy Commissioner Muhammad Ali, Senior Superintendent of Police Capt. (Retd) Zafar Iqbal, Deputy Superintendent of Police I/9 Circle Jameel Hashmi, Inspector Rukhsar Mehdi (SHO Kohsar Police Station) and Muhammad Siraj (ASI). All the officers appeared before the court on notice and tendered their unconditional apology over the incident of manhandling that occurred on March 13 while Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was going to the Supreme Court for attending the meeting of the Supreme Judicial Council.

The bench said the unconditional apology would be considered after hearing the case in detail and adjourned the proceedings till April 25.

All the officers have already been given an opportunity by the bench to submit their written statements. Deputy Attorney General Raja Muhammad Irshad assisted the Attorney General.

Mujeeb-ur-Rehman advocate represented the Inspector General of Police, Chief Commissioner and Senior Superintendent of Police. Qazi Muhammad Amin appeared as counsel of Inspector Rukhsar Mehdi and ASI Siraj Ahmed.

Raja Bashir represented Deputy Commissioner Islamabad, Muhammad Ali. Ibrahim Satti represented DSP Jamil Hashmi DSP.

Justice Ijaz Afzal Khan of Peshawar High Court had inquired into the incident on the orders of the Supreme Court and submitted his report after which charges were framed.

Link

This is interesting. Lemme drag Mush by his hair and then i will apologize.

I believe the officers should be severly punished and an example must be set for others to avoid such incidents in future

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Bukhari quits over news report

Secretary Establishment Syed Tariq Ali Bukhari on Friday tendered his resignation to the prime minister citing The News story on Friday — “Dubious standing of the prime witness” — as the reason.

In his “Note for the Prime Minister”, surprisingly also faxed to media houses, Bukhari said, “I joined government service in 1970. For the last 37 years, I have served the government to the best of my capabilities with dignity, honour and without fear and favour. To uphold these principles, I have had to face pressures and make personal sacrifices. The reward and satisfaction has been the reputation that I have enjoyed in the government service. Regrettably, all this seems to have come to an end with the personal slender in a news item published in the daily ‘The News’ of today. Sir, the confirmation of your orders, regarding extension in my re-employment beyond two years was conveyed to the Establishment Division only after the FPSC had given their concurrence. The summary for this was initiated by the Establishment Division on 3rd March, 2007 and routed through Chairman FPSC.”

Bukhari’s note for the prime minister says: “Apart from the slender, the news item quotes ‘top mandarins in the Prime Minister’s Secretariat’ to have been surprised by extension in my re-employment. Under these circumstances, it is not possible for me to continue to discharge my responsibilities with a clear conscience, I would, therefore, request you to accept my resignation. The terms of my contract require one month’s notice or payment of one month’s salary in lieu thereof. I would request that my resignation be accepted with immediate effect. The one-month salary may be adjusted by not paying me for the 13 days of the month of April, 2007 that I have served already. As I do not have resources to make full payment for the remaining days, the balance amount may be deducted in easy instalments from my pension.”

The News Friday’s story said the prime government witness against the chief justice of Pakistan is a re-employed federal secretary who got unexpected but illegal extension just a week before the presidential reference was filed against the country’s top judge. If the word “slender” used by ED secretary in his resignation letter meant “slander”, then it is suffice to say that The News story did not contain any comment on Bukhari’s person or reputation.

Sources confirm that the secretary Establishment got third-year extension on March 3 through a formal notification issued by the Establishment Division (ED). The said notification was issued following verbal orders from the top. A formal summary for extension was initiated only after the extension was granted whereas the mandatory consultation with the FPSC was a follow-up affair instead of being the pre-requisite as required by the law.

On March 4, 2005 some of the newspapers including The News highlighted the fact that the ED secretary’s extension was a violation of the law and did not carry the mandatory consent of the FPSC. No denial or clarification was ever issued. Normally in cases where any extension in the contract is required, a summary is moved weeks before the expiry of the existing contract period.

Interestingly, within a fortnight before the secretary ED was granted 3rd years extension, it was the ED itself that had issued a circular to all the ministries and divisions asking them to fulfil the legal requirement of consulting the FPSC in contract appointments beyond two years. The ministries and divisions were asked by the ED that summary of cases, where any extension beyond two years is required, should be moved before the expiry of the existing contract of the concerned officer.

Even in case of a routine re-employment, the Estacode (the book of statutes, rules etc governing civil bureaucracy) sets extremely strict parameters for such appointments. These parameters are, however, rarely followed.

On page 1013, the Estacode says: “Re-employment after superannuation:- It has been noticed that ministries/divisions initiate proposals for re-employment of government servants after superannuation as a routine measure. It is emphasized that re-employment beyond superannuation should be an exception and not the rule. It may be recommended only on cases where government considers that the experience gained by the retiring person is of vital importance and can be gainfully utilised, particularly in fields where suitably qualified and experienced persons are not available.”

The Estacode says: “2. For achievement of the objectives above, the present government has framed a policy for re-employment of government servants and cases for re-employment would, in future, be considered in accordance with the following criteria:

(i) Non availability of suitably qualified or experienced officers to replace the retiring officers;

(ii) The officer is a highly competent person with distinction in his profession/field.

(iii) The re-employment does not cause a promotion block; and

(iv) Retention of the retiring officer, for a specified period, is in the public interest.

This policy would also apply to government controlled corporations and other autonomous bodies.”

According to the Estacode (page 1020) even the cabinet had decided not to give re-employments to retired officers as a routine. It says: “The cabinet in its meeting held on 12-11-1990 has decided that no re-employment beyond the age of superannuation should be allowed except in very exceptional cases for which approval of the Prime Minister would need to be obtained.”

The Estacode also emphasises that “the ministries/divisions are advised not to initiate cases of re-employment of civil servants beyond the age of superannuation unless that is considered unavoidable due to non-availability of his replacement and the importance and sensitivity of the job which must be clearly brought out while initiating any such proposal”.

It is also interesting to note that the secretary ED in his resignation said that he served government without any fear and favour. He added: “To up-hold these principles, I have had to face pressures and make personal sacrifices.”

However, in the presidential reference against the CJ, it is noted: “Due to relentless pressure and the campaign of intimidation and harassment launched by him (CJ), ultimately a summary was prepared and submitted by the Establishment Secretary on 23 June 2006 to the Prime Minister for addition of a new “Rule 7-C” in the Police Service of Pakistan (Composition, Cadre and Seniority) Rules, 1985. The amendment was tailor-made for Dr Arsalan Iftikhar.”


http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=7139

Atleast there are some honorable men left in this country unlike Mush and Aziz.

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Woman judge ‘rewarded’

Sajida Chaudhry, a lady civil judge, who was the first serving judicial officer to have attended Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry’s maiden address to the Rawalpindi Bar on March 26 during the ongoing judicial crisis, has been posted to Bhakkar, several hundred kilometres away from her family.

On March 27—a day after she added a new flavour to the judicial crisis, while no other judge from the Punjab attended the March 26 address of the chief justice — Sajida Chaudhry was made official on special duty (OSD) and asked to report to the Lahore High Court.

Settled in Islamabad with her husband and three young children the lady judge got an order to move to Bhakkar and join her duty as the civil judge there. She is believed to be the first ever lady judge to have been posted in Bhakkar, located in southern Punjab.

With her husband already doing a job in Islamabad and children attending local schools, Sajida Chaudhry’s transfer to Bhakkar has become a unique case where a mother and a wife has to leave the family to join her new assignment hundreds of miles away.

Under the federal or the provincial government policies, a woman government servant could not be posted out of a station where her husband is settled or posted. In case both the husband and the wife are in government service, it is envisaged in the policy that they will be posted in the same station. In cases where the wife is in the government service and the husband is in the private sector, even then she could not be posted to any other station. The Lahore High Court, however, has not adhered to such policy.

Her presence in Justice Chaudhry’s address to the Rawalpindi Bar on March 26, when the rest of the members of the Punjab judiciary were sitting in their chambers, became the focus of the media. When asked if she would quit, she calmly replied: “Why should I resign? I did nothing against the law, I came here to welcome the chief justice, and it is my duty.”

Though the lady judge was made an OSD the very next day and transferred from Gujar Khan to Lahore and now posted to Bhakkar, she served as the first drop of rain for her brother judges.

During the second public appearance of the top judge in Sukkur and Hyderabad to address the bar associations there, 11 judges of the Sindh High Court attended Justice Iftikhar’s reception. A number of sessions judges and members of the subordinate judiciary also attended the CJ’s address.

Two judges of the Sindh High Court, justices Zia Pervez and Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui, were present at the Sukkur airport to welcome the top judge of the country. During his last address to the Peshawar Bar, the chief justice was welcomed by 12 judges of the Peshawar High Court, including the chief justice of Peshawar High Court. It was on this occasion, the chief justice read the famous Urdu couplet, which meant: “I alone started my journey to the destination — then people started joining me and a caravan came into being.”

The chief justice reached Peshawar from Islamabad after a journey of nine hours. He was showered with rose petals all the way by ordinary people, political workers and lawyers at different places during his travel on April 21.

Now the chief justice is scheduled to go to Lahore and address the Lahore Bar on May 5. He is going there by road and this will be the first ever occasion after March 26 for the Punjab judges to show if they would welcome the country’s top judge in the similar manner as was done in the Sindh and the NWFP.


Link

 

[Lahori paa jee]

According to what i know this is what happened on 9th march and how CJ was forced to stay at the camp office. Not only that he was grilled by the chiefs of ISI, IB and MI. He was asked to resign and threatened with dire consequences. Musharraf left him with the officers with the hope that CJ would resign under pressure. But the man stood his ground. It said the CJ at one instance started reciting Kalma fearing they might kill him. But they eventually let him go and thats how all this started

This link confirms what i have said

 

[BATMAN]

Supreme Judicial Council
Thursday April 26, 2007 (1552 PST)

The question of an Acting Chief Justice of Pakistan (ACJP) presiding over the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) is being hotly debated these days over the media. The lawyers defending the Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry in the Presidential Reference against him say that under the article 209 of the Constitution only the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) can preside over the SJC and there is no mention in it of any Acting CJP doing so. As a matter of fact, whereas the article 209 lays down the detailed procedures for the tabling of a reference against the judges, composition of the SJC, determining the seniority of the judges for the SJC and so on so forth, it is surprisingly silent on the subject of the procedure to be adopted if a presidential reference is tabled against the CJP himself. Ch. Aitezaz Ahsan and his team are invoking this ‘legal lacuna’ to their advantage and trying to stall the proceedings. In a petition they have questioned the composition of the SJC for its being presided by an ACJP, apart from objecting to two other judges to sit as its members.

I am alive to my limitations of the legal matters of such import, but kindly allow me to ask:

Can the President under the constitution send a reference against the CJP?
I think, Yes.

Can a Judge hear a case against his own self?
I think, No.

By analogy, therefore, can the CJP preside over the SJC to hear the reference against his own self?
I think, No.

Who should then preside over the SJC?
I think the next senior most judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, in the same spirit of the law as provided in the constitution for appointing the next senior most judge as member of the SJC in the event of the non-availability of the senior most judge of the Supreme Court or the High Courts of Pakistan.

If the CJP and the lawyers defending him are still not convinced then the only course left is to amend the article 209 of the constitution to allow (1) to appoint an ACJP in the ‘life’ of the actual CJP, and (2) allow such ACJP to preside over the SJC to hear the reference. But in this case, by the time cows come home, the roof of the home might be blown away by the winds.

Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)
jafri@rifiela.com
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?176317

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Text of chief justice’s affidavit

Following is the text of affidavit filed by the Chief Justice Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry in the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Text begins:

"IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Jurisdiction)

In Re: Constitutional Original Petition No: __________ /2007

Chief Justice of Pakistan,

Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry,

Chief Justice House,

Islamabad

------------------------------------------------------------------Petitioner

VERSUS

The President of Pakistan,

The Referring Authority,

Presidency,

Islamabad.

AND OTHERS

-------------------------------------------------------------Respondents

AFFIDAVIT OF THE PETITIONER,

MR Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry,

Chief Justice of Pakistan,

I, Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, The Chief Justice of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as the "deponent") do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

That the deponent has filed the titled petition in this Hon'ble Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, inter alia, assailing the Reference No.43/2007 dated March 09, 2007;Notification No F.1 (2)/2005.A.II dated 09-03-2007, whereby the deponent was illegally and unlawfully restrained to perform his constitutional functions as a judge of this Hon'ble Court and as Chief Justice of Pakistan; Order dated March 09, 2007 passed by the Supreme Judicial Council; Notification No F.1(2)2005.A.II dated 15-03-2007 whereby the deponent was sent on compulsory leave with retrospective effect and the constitution and competence of the Supreme Judicial Council as well as the mode and manner of the proceedings before the Council.

This affidavit is being filed in support of the contentions, assertions and pleas raised in the above titled petition. The deponent verifies that the contents of the titled affidavit are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief and nothing has been concealed. In addition to the facts narrated in the titled petition; the deponent states that:

On March 09, 2007, the deponent headed Bench No 1 of this Hon'ble Court as Chief Justice of Pakistan and heard several cases till about 10.30 a.m. The Bench rose briefly and had to reassemble for the day except the deponent who left for the Army House, Rawalpindi to meet the President of Pakistan (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent")

The deponent arrived at Army House, Rawalpindi at about 11-30 a.m. along with his staff/protocol staff. The deponent was shown to a waiting room/visitors room. After five minutes of his arrival, the Respondent, wearing his Military Uniform came into the room along with his MS and ADC. As soon as the Respondent took his seat, a number of TV cameramen and photographers were also ushered into the room. They took several pictures and made movie footage.

While discussing the SAARC Law Conference, SAARC Chief Justices Conference and the concluding session of the Golden Jubilee ceremony of the Supreme Court, the Respondent said that a compliant against the deponent had been received by him (Respondent) from a Judge of the Peshawar High Court. The deponent replied that it was not based on true facts as his case had been decided by a two-member bench and that attempts were being made to maliciously involve the other member of the Bench as well. On this the Respondent said that there are a few more complaints against the deponent as well. After saying so, he directed his staff to call the other persons.

On the direction of the Respondent, the 'other persons' entered the room. They included the Prime Minster, DG MI, DG ISI, DG IB, COS and another official. All officials (except DG, IB and COS) were in uniform.

The Respondent started reading from small pieces of paper with notes on them which he had in his hand. There was no single consolidated document. The allegations, which were being put to the deponent had been taken from the contents of a notorious letter written by Mr Naeem Bukhari with absolutely no substance in them. The deponent strongly refuted these allegations as being baseless and engineered to defame him personally and the judiciary as a whole. The deponent promptly denied the veracity and credibility of these allegations as well.

On this the Respondent said that the deponent had obtained cars from the Supreme Court for his family. The allegation was vehemently denied by the deponent. The Respondent went on to say that the deponent was being driven in a Mercedes, to which the deponent promptly replied 'here is the Prime Minister, ask him, he has sent the Car himself'. The PM did not reply to this answer even by gesture. Surprisingly the Respondent went on to say that the deponent had interfered in the affairs of Lahore High Court and had not accepted and taken heed of most of the recommendations of the Chief Justice of Lahore High Court.

The Respondent insisted that the deponent should resign. The Respondent also said that in case of deponent's resignation, he (the Respondent) would 'accommodate' him (the deponent). He also said in case of refusal to resign, the deponent will have to face the reference which could be a bigger embarrassment for the deponent. The deponent finally and more resolutely said 'I wouldn't resign and would face any reference since I am innocent; I have not violated any code of conduct or any law, rule or regulation; I believe that I am myself the guardian of law. I strongly believe in God who will help me'. This ignited the fury of the Respondent; he stood up angrily and left the room along with his MS, COS and the Prime Minister of Pakistan, saying that others would show evidence to the deponent. (This has now been admitted by the Respondent in his interview given to Aaj TV). The meeting continued for not more than 30 minutes.

The DG MI, DG ISI and DG IB remained behind and continued to sit with the deponent. They did not show the deponent a single piece of evidence. In fact, no official except DG ISI had some documents with him but he also did not show any thing to the deponent. They, however, said that the deponent had secured a seat for his son in Bolan Medical College when the deponent was serving as a Judge of Balochistan High Court. They (except DG, IB) insisted that deponent resign while the deponent continued to assert strongly that the allegations were baseless and for a collateral purpose.

During the subsequent hours, the deponent was forced to stay in that room. Sometimes, all the persons would leave the deponent alone in that room but would not allow the deponent to leave it. It was obvious that the deponent was being watched by a close circuit camera because whenever he tried to open the door to go out, he was confronted by an officer who prevented the exit of the deponent; several times the deponent expressed the desire to leave but was told by military officials to stay/wait. Once the deponent was even told that respondent would be seeing him again. At one point, the deponent requested that at least his staff/protocol officer be called inside the room as the deponent wanted to talk to him but was told that he could not come inside. The deponent then requested that his staff/protocol officer be told to pass on the message to the deponent's family that he was at Army House, Rawalpindi and that his programme to go to Lahore had been cancelled.

Despite several attempts to leave the room and the Army House, the deponent was made to stay there on one pretext or the other. His request to bring his car to the porch for departure was also denied. After the first meeting with the Respondent which lasted for not more than 30 minutes, the deponent was kept there 'absolutely against his will' till past 5p.m.

After 5pm, DG MI came in again and told the deponent that his car was outside to drive him 'home'. DG MI came out of the room and once outside told the deponent, 'this is a bad day, now you are taking a separate way and you are informed that you have been "restrained to work as a judge of the Supreme Court or Chief Justice of Pakistan''

When the deponent saw the car of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, he discovered that his car had been stripped of both the flag of Pakistan and the emblem flag. The staff officer of the deponent informed him that Mr Justice Javed Iqbal had taken oath as Acting Chief Justice and it had been shown on TV. The driver also informed the deponent that he had been instructed not to take the deponent to the Supreme Court while on way to the residence of the deponent.

While on the way, the deponent directed the driver to go to Supreme Court but an Army official prevented the deponent's car near the Sports Complex from proceeding further. In the meanwhile, Mr Tariq Masood Yasin, SP, also appeared; He ordered the driver to come out of car so that he could drive the deponent and also asked the deponent's gunman to come out of the car as well. The deponent said 'okay, I will not go to the Supreme Court but my driver will drive my car and my gunman will escort me home'. Only then, did Mr Tariq Masood Yasin, SP agree to let the car be driven by deponent's driver.

The deponent got home at about 5.45 p.m. and was shocked to see police officials and agencies personnel without uniform all over his residence. The deponent also discovered that landline phones had already been disconnected; Cell Phones, TV, Cables and DSL had been jammed or disconnected. The deponent and his family were completely cut off for several days from the outside world.

By 9 p.m., March 09, 2007, the vehicles which were in official use of the deponent including a Mercedes had been taken away by means of a lifter. Latter on, the same night, one vehicle was brought back but the key was not handed over to the deponent or someone on his behalf.

On March 10, 2007, the deponent received a 'Notice' from Supreme Judicial Council ("Council") whereby the deponent came to know that a Reference (No 43/2007) had been filed by the Respondent before the Council. There was also a copy of the Order passed by the Council whereby deponent had been restrained to function as a Judge of the Supreme Court and or Chief Justice of Pakistan. The copy of the aforesaid Reference had also been appended with the Notice with without any annexure or supporting documents for perusal of the deponent.

It was also surprising for the deponent to note that the aforesaid reference came up for hearing on March 9, 2007 after 6 p.m. in indecent haste. Two members of the Council as was evident from news published in daily Nawa-i-Waqt dated March 10, 2007, had been flown to Islamabad in special flights, from Lahore and Karachi simply to participate in a meeting of the Council. In fact, no meeting had been called by the Secretary of the Council namely Mr Faqir Hussain. No one had issued either agenda for the meeting or notice thereof.

The Council, rather than merely scrutinising the material, if at all and serving notice on the deponent (without prejudice to the rights and interest of the deponent as averred in the titled petition), went ahead and passed an order very detrimental to the interests of the deponent as well as the interests of the institution. The deponent was restrained to perform his functions as a Judge of the Supreme Court Judge and or Chief Justice of Pakistan.

The deponent further states that he had been detained along with his family members including his infant child of seven years from the evening of March 9, 2007 till March 13, 2007. The personal and private life of the deponent and his family suffered a great shock and the concept of privacy appeared as if it was an impotent word. The deponent could not use any vehicle since there was none. The deponent had to walk till the other end of the road when the police officer confronted him and manhandled him as has now been established by a judicial enquiry.

The Supreme Court staff attached to the deponent was reportedly missing and had been kept at an unknown place. An attempt was being made to fabricate the evidence through them by coercive means against the deponent. Even other employees working at the residence of the deponent were taken and made to appear before some agency officials. They were released after 2/3 days. The grocery man was not allowed to go to collect grocery; he was made to wait till an agency official accompanied him to the market and back.

The chamber of the deponent was sealed and certain files lying therein were removed and some of them had been handed over to the ISI under the supervision of the newly appointed Registrar. Such an act was contrary to all norms and practices of judiciary. The deponent being the CJP was entitled to occupy his chamber along with his staff.

On account of deployment of heavy contingents, no one was allowed to meet the deponent freely, in as much as his colleagues were not allowed access to meet him. Even a retired judge of this Hon'ble Court Mr Justice (Retd) Munir A Sheikh was not allowed to meet the deponent.

The deponent was not all alone to suffer this agony. Even his children were not allowed to go to school, college and university. The deponent and his family members were deprived of basic amenities of life, i.e. medicines and doctors, etc.

Even when ordered by the Council, the deponent was deprived of the assistance of his counsels to seek legal assistance regarding legal and factual issues involved in the reference. The deponent and his family have been made to go through a lot of mental, physical and emotional agony, torture and embarrassment and words could never be enough to properly and adequately express that.

All these tactics were used to put pressure on the deponent so that he may tender his resignation from the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. But after March 13, 2007 when the deponent succeeded in establishing at least some contact with his lawyers team during a brief appearance before the Council and after March 16, 2007, the on going pressure to 'resign the office' was released to some extent.

The deponent now believes that his entire house has been bugged and at the Sindh House which is located right opposite the residence of the deponent, the officials of the agencies other than police have established a place therein to keep an eye on those who come and visit me, etc.

On account of the facts stated hereinabove, the children of the deponents are so scared that they could not go to school or university. As a result thereof, one of my daughters failed to appear in her exams (1st year, Federal Board) whereas my other daughter who is a student of Bahria university is not being allowed to take her examination (1st semester) due to lack of attendance in internal studies. My younger son is also not in a position to attend his school because of circumstances through which I am passing.

Deponent

Verification:

Verified on oath this ___________day of ______________2007 at Islamabad that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and information and nothing has been concealed therein from this Hon'ble Court."

Link

 

[Neo]

Saturday, June 09, 2007

Good news soon, says Musharraf

* President says judicial and political crises to be over in a few days

ISLAMABAD: President General Pervez Musharraf said on Friday the people would soon hear good news regarding the current judicial and political crises and asked the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML) to concentrate on the forthcoming general elections.

Musharraf said this to parliamentarians and federal ministers during separate meetings at his Parliament House chamber.

“The prevailing judicial and political crises in the country will be resolved in a few days and the parliamentarians and PML workers should concentrate on the forthcoming general elections,” Musharraf said, adding, “The ongoing drama will end itself very soon and there is nothing to worry about it.”

The president told the parliamentarians that the PML and its allies should forge unity and shun their petty political differences before the polls. He asked them to reach to the people and inform them of the government’s performance so that the PML and its coalition partners could secure majority votes in the elections.

Those who called on President Musharraf included Federal Minister for Population Welfare Chaudhry Shahbaz Hussain, Minister of State for Overseas Pakistanis Raza Hayat Hiraj and MNAs Sheikh Waqas, Riffat Javed Kahloon, Mazhar Qureshi and Bilal Virk.

“There is nothing to worry about the prevailing tension and all the ruling parliamentarians should defend my policies and agenda during electioneering in their respective constituencies,” sources quoted Musharraf as saying to the parliamentarians.

The president told them that the election schedule would be announced soon after the passing of the federal budget by the National Assembly. He urged all legislators to participate actively in the budget session.

The parliamentarians briefed the president about the problems of their constituencies and he assured them that their issues would be resolved.

Online adds: The president told the parliamentarians that they have to play a vital role in eliminating terrorism and extremism from Pakistan. “You should take the people on board against terrorism and extremism. We have to ensure the success of moderate forces in the general elections,” he said.

Musharraf said that he would increase his interactions with the people and continue to address public meetings.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\06\09\story_9-6-2007_pg1_1

 

[Lahori paa jee]

Rendering CJ non-functional

Barrister Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, counsel for the chief justice, on Thursday said that the court should show the same reaction to the act of the president to restrain the chief justice from functioning as shown by the Army when Gen Pervez Musharraf was removed as the Chief of Army Staff.

Heading the 13-member full court, Justice Khalilur Rahman Ramday observed that the institutional reaction should be legal one. Aitzaz, who continued his arguments on Thursday on the legal aspect of the issue in the context of the sequence of incidents between March 9 and 13. He argued the president (the referring authority) should have formed opinion before forwarding the reference against the chief justice to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) for further proceedings.

Aitzaz said there should be relevant material to form an opinion that a judge is guilty and this opinion could not be made in the presence of intelligence agencies rather a panel of constitutional experts should be involved.

The 13-member full court headed by Justice Khalilur Rahman Ramday and comprising Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice M Javed Buttar, Justice Tassadduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Syed Jamshed Ali, Justice Hamid Ali Mirza and Justice Ghulam Rabbani was conducting regular hearing on the merits of the CJ’s case.

Aitzaz further said the basic fundamental rights have been violated in the chief justice case. Justice Ramday observed that it is very strange that there was no protection to the fundamental rights of the judges in the Constitution.

Referring to Malik Asad Ali case, Aitzaz said the chief justice trial could be conducted only by a full court as a trial court where the evidences would also be recorded. He contended that the purpose of filing the reference was to malign the chief justice. He said that opinion formation is based on mala fide in the case of the chief justice, which is to be decided by the Supreme Court.

Aitzaz said if the chief justice wanted to mint money, he could have made millions of rupees in the steel mills case. He said the president is bound by the prime minister in forming the opinion but it is clear from the affidavits submitted by the intelligence head that the opinion was formed without the consultation of the prime minister.

Aitzaz argued that no general is consulted in the process of appointment of judges then why they (the generals) were consulted in the removal of the chief justice. He termed it manipulation of law.

Aitzaz said the heads of intelligence agencies, in the affidavits, had denied that the chief justice was detained and phone lines at his residence were cut off. He said to the head of the full court that he might better know the fact as his residence is near to the chief justice’s residence. On it, Justice Ramday said he does not want to be a witness in the case.

Terming the images of the chief justice’s case more serious than a murder case, Aitzaz added the arrangements for the SJC meeting on March 9 were made before the oath taking of the acting chief justice. “The SJC could meet on Monday (March 12) and why every action was taken in haste.”

He further said the prime minister represents will of people, but in Pakistan, the PM represents will of the commanders. Aitzaz was on the rostrum when the court time was over and the hearing of the case was adjourned for Monday as counsel for the president Sharifuddin Pirzada and counsel for the federation Malik Qayyum would not be available today (on Friday).

Link