Pakistani government provides the military with further antidemocratic powers

[VCheng]

The Protection of Pakistan Ordinance explicitly states that the burden of proof falls on the person arrested: “An accused facing the charge of a scheduled offence on existence of reasonable evidence against him, shall be presumed to be engaged in waging war or insurrection against Pakistan unless he establishes his non-involvement in the offence.”

Guilty unless proven otherwise?

This abomination of a law will never work properly. Ever.

 

[Rahi812]

So, Is this the pakistani version of AFSPA?

Yes. Armed Forces Special Protection Act in India passed in 1958.

So these sorts of military powers are more or less everywhere in the world.

 

[Areesh]

How does talking about something with Pakistan make it a disputed territory. We talk about Pakistan using its border areas in Punjab as terror training camps.. Does that make Pakistani Punjab, a disputed area?? And CM of J&K is not GOI.. Just like Imran Khan supporting TTP does not translate to Pakistan supporting TTP, Omar Abdullah's stand is not automatically the stand of GOI...

You don't talk about resolving Pakistani punjab issue with Pakistan. You just discuss some border issues with Pakistan like you do with any other country. Just like we won't discuss our Baluchistan problem with anyone no matter who that country is. Even if it is Uncle Sam. Same doesn't happen in Kashmir case. may be because of obvious reasons. It is a disputed territory.

Omar Abdullah might not be GOI but still his statement means a lot as he appointed CM of the same said territory.

 

[karan.1970]

You don't talk about resolving Pakistani punjab issue with Pakistan. You just discuss some border issues with Pakistan like you do with any other country. Just like we won't discuss our Baluchistan problem with anyone no matter who that country is. Even if it is Uncle Sam. Same doesn't happen in Kashmir case. may be because of obvious reasons. It is a disputed territory.

Show me one formal GOI document calling Kashmir as disputed and I will yield.. And lets go back to the topic which is sweeping powers given to Pakistani army on the lines of Indian AFSPA

Omar Abdullah might not be GOI but still his statement means a lot as he appointed CM of the same said territory.

Elected and not appointed.. And you need to learn a little bit on the federation structure of Central and state govt before you can decide whether his statements mean a lot or not...

 

[Areesh]

Show me one formal GOI document calling Kashmir as disputed and I will yield.. And lets go back to the topic which is sweeping powers given to Pakistani army on the lines of Indian AFSPA

Actions speak louder than words. They might not call it disputed due to fear of domestic backlash but they continue discussing issue of Kashmir with us and will continue to do so. Not calling it disputed territory is for domestic consumption. It is meant to be sold to you and other Indians. I have no problem in discussing the original topic siince it is you who brought Kashmir in this thread. Even though difference is too big and obvious.

Elected and not appointed.. And you need to learn a little bit on the federation structure of Central and state govt before you can decide whether his statements mean a lot or not...

We consider them appointed. From Delhi. Would continue to be appointed in the future. You can consider them elected or whatever.

Fur us he his statements mean a lot. After all he is appointed representative of IOK.

 

[karan.1970]

Actions speak louder than words. They might not call it disputed due to fear of domestic backlash but they continue discussing issue of Kashmir with us and will continue to do so. Not calling it disputed territory is for domestic consumption. It is meant to be sold to you and other Indians. I have no problem in discussing the original topic siince it is you who brought Kashmir in this thread. Even though difference is too big and obvious.

Not calling it disputed is basis Indian constitution.. And there is no difference really in the context we are discussing here. What powers India has given to Army in Kashmir, Pakistan has for whole of Pakistan.

We consider them appointed. From Delhi. Would continue to be appointed in the future. You can consider them elected or whatever.

Fur us he his statements mean a lot. After all he is appointed representative of IOK.

Who cares what Pakistanis believe in context to the State Govt in J&K.. For all i care you may believe them to be descended from jannat .. and good if his statements mean a lot to you..

 

[Areesh]

Not calling it disputed is basis Indian constitution.. And there is no difference really in the context we are discussing here. What powers India has given to Army in Kashmir, Pakistan has for whole of Pakistan.

Then Indian govt is violating their own constitution by discussing Kashmir dispute with Pakistan. Yes the law is for the whole country since TTP is waging war on the whole country and not just one region.

Who cares what Pakistanis believe in context to the State Govt in J&K.. For all i care you may believe them to be descended from jannat .. and good if his statements mean a lot to you..

OK. No issues with that either.

 

[karan.1970]

Then Indian govt is violating their own constitution by discussing Kashmir dispute with Pakistan.

How so ??

Yes the law is for the whole country since TTP is waging war on the whole country and not just one region.

And that's what I was saying in the 1st post..

OK. No issues with that either.

 

[Gautam]

These kind of laws are valid in India too. Except that its valid for just one state. But in Pakistan, its applicable for the entire country. Wow. Just wow.

 

[Rural depths]

Dear Members! I am in a dire need of your advice!
I was born to a Pakistani mother and an Indian father (both Muslims), consequently my nationality by birth was Indian. During my childhood my father died and we came Pakistan and acquired its citizenship. I did matric, fsc then completed my engineering here. Now I cleared a test and interview for a strategic organization of pakistan that deals with its defence. They have sent me forms for security clearance purposes in which I have to give details about my father. They have also asked for the name and details of any relative residing in India. I do have relatives there but I know nothing about them and I am reluctant also to provide details about my father. What should I do? Please help me out!! I couldn't find a relevant forum for it so have posted randomly but please do give me advice of what to do.

 

[Rural depths]

Dear Members! I am in a dire need of your advice!
I was born to a Pakistani mother and an Indian father (both Muslims), consequently my nationality by birth was Indian. During my childhood my father died and we came Pakistan and acquired its citizenship. I did matric, fsc then completed my engineering here. Now I cleared a test and interview for a strategic organization of pakistan that deals with its defence. They have sent me forms for security clearance purposes in which I have to give details about my father. They have also asked for the name and details of any relative residing in India. I do have relatives there but I know nothing about them and I am reluctant also to provide details about my father. What should I do? Please help me out!! I couldn't find a relevant forum for it so have posted randomly but please do give me advice of what to do.

 

[MastanKhan]

I don't know how many times do I have to make it understand people, judiciary cannot hold or release accused (crime is not yet proven, right?) at its whim. Bailable or non bailable pretty much depends on the nature of the FIR. It is not the magistrate or the judge who decides about the severity of the case but the police officer.

For example, according to PPC (Pakistan Penal Code), there are some 39 sections (299 to 338) in chapter XVI 'OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY'. Depending on the crime scene, and after taking into account the witnesses (if any), and evidences (if any), the police officer would decide which section to apply to that particular crime scene. Some section are are bailable whereas others are non bailable. Now based on the section applied, witness, evidence, and after hearing arguments from the solicitors, the magistrate or the judge will decide whether to grant the bail or not. I have had chance to discuss the cases and personally witness the court proceedings in lower courts with my best friend, a session judge (martyred by Baloch insurgents in 2012, on his way to the court), and I know things don't happen the way people try to present them here.

Terrorists don't get bail because judiciary ain't doing its job, but primarily because of the poor FIR, and lack of evidence and witnesses. Judiciary has to base her decisions on the available laws given in the Penal Code. Does someone know PPC is composed of laws drafted in the year 1860? Naturally, a lot of things have changed since than. It was the job of the supposedly 'law makers' to have drafted or amended the PPC as per the changed circumstances. They never did their job, and found comfort in putting all the blame on the judiciary. It is funny isn't it; you don't give me a pen to write, and than blame me of not drafting the required piece.

Please also note that you cant expect a judicial magistrate or a session judge to take on terrorist as per your desire, because these poor souls have no security. Those who are brave enough end up in their graves like my friend, who was hearing the case of weapon trafficking against Barhamdagh Bugti. This is an irony, compare this to last week's news... Mr. Nisar (the interior minister) does not want to use the bullet-proof car, which was previously in use of the ex-interior minister, Mr. Malik. Reason given, the car was old and could have not protected against RPG, or IEDs.

My friend, it is very convenient for you to put all blame on the judiciary, but ask us, who have lost our finest, and loved ones in the judiciary.

Really? Are you? Is this the language you are taught in the law college? If this much respect you have for your chosen profession, than I can only pray for the judiciary to have her spared from your likes.

Hi,

POOR quality FIR is just an excuse by incompetent judges. The same sh-iyt happens in the U S as well. Sometimes the FIR is not right----but on the request of the DA---the judge grants continuation and corrction of charges---understanding that there has been a terrorist act committed.

Pakistani judges are criminals----they will perform only one way---hang 'em----. Not one terrorist sentenced and executed in 12 years----.

 

[syedali73]

Pakistani judges are criminals----they will perform only one way---hang 'em----. Not one terrorist sentenced and executed in 12 years----.

Not all, or otherwise provide the proof that all the judges are criminal. Stop acting like a divine entity who is aware of everything. You are good for nothing except bickering.

Terrorists have not been executed has nothing to do with the judiciary. This is an administrative issue. This again shows how little (if any) knowledge you have of the system

It is not only terrorist, other criminals who were given death sentence could not be hanged too because of European Union pressure on the GoP to suspend death sentence in Pakistan.