What is your reason for saying that?
Pakistani High court orders Musharraf's arrest.
- Thread starter Pksecurity
- Start date
- Status
What is your reason for saying that?
Rahil khan
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,783
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Check the statistics of suicide bomb blasts before and after Red Mosque operation in Pakistan.
Marwat Khan Lodhi
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 5,341
- Reaction score
- -29
- Country
- Location
Monkey D Luffy and afghnais_hehe are the same person?
Conspiracy theory of the year
Monkey D Luffy and afghnais_hehe are the same person
Conspiracy theory of the year
Marwat Khan Lodhi
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 5,341
- Reaction score
- -29
- Country
- Location
nope i m a hardcore pakistani and he is a hardcore afghani and a hardcore antipakistani and a softcore pakistani ... i cant describe him he is like 9 personalities at one time..some of his posts will b pro pakistan and some with b extreme antipakistan and pro afghani, some will be in the favour of india and some will b against india.. sometimes he is thinking something else and writing something really bs.. that is why i never take him seriously ,, he is one person who has got an extreme mental disorder
I am a free thinker, its just that you are confused about me, i seem blurry to you because defect is in your eyes
afghanis_hehe
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2012
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 0
I am a free thinker, its just that you are confused about me, i seem blurry to you because defect is in your eyes
well the only defect that i have in my eyes is that i can only withstand truth n only truth..
I'm guessing that he meant that the lal masjid operation itself was unjustified, and not because of the consequences that it brought about.
Mian H Amin.
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 407
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Who let Raymond davis and people like him into Pakistan ? wasnt that MUsharaf ? i agree that powers that let him return to Pakistan wont let him die like this, but atleast he will have hard time..
Rahil khan
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,783
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Brother, Red Mosque is a most painful chapter for us....There were militants inside that Mosque..AGREED. They were implementing there own agenda..AGREED. They were giving bad name to Pakistan internationally...AGREED. They were responsible of taking lives of our priceless SSG Officer and Jawans..AGREED.. They were also responsible for promoting extremist ideologies among students due to which all that mess was created...AGREED. But this issue was also thoroughly mishandled by the government. Why those government officials were sleeping when such huge amount of weapons were brought inside the Madrassa??? Why they never got alert before the start of that whole scenario??? Whey the situation was allowed to be so devastating, with such devastating outcomes and such catastrophic long term results...Right under the nose of government it all was happening and yet they were ignoring or ALLOWING those activities by the extremists.... to convince the world about the rising extremism phenomenon in Pakistan PLUS to get international support for the Musharaf's regime to tackle with such issues.
Abu Zolfiqar
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2009
- Messages
- 22,555
- Reaction score
- 22
- Country
- Location
What a sham trial.
If I were him I'd be casually smoking a Havana and giving all those black coats the middle finger
Until they go after rental rajas, 10 percents and maulana diesels I won't take the court too seriously. But that's just me
He fought for his country in uniform and in civilian garb despite mistakes, his performance brought more results than the treacherous and unpatriotic goons who came out of hiding
If I were him I'd be casually smoking a Havana and giving all those black coats the middle finger
Until they go after rental rajas, 10 percents and maulana diesels I won't take the court too seriously. But that's just me
He fought for his country in uniform and in civilian garb despite mistakes, his performance brought more results than the treacherous and unpatriotic goons who came out of hiding
Edevelop
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
Musharraf Flees Court in Pakistan After Judge Orders His Arrest
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — When the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf ended his years of exile last month, it was with a vision of himself as a political savior, returning
Instead, he contributed a new and bizarre chapter to the country’s political turmoil on Thursday, fleeing the halls of the High Court after a judge ordered his arrest. Speeding away in a convoy of black S.U.V.’s as a crowd of lawyers mocked him, he hurried to his fortress compound outside the capital, where he was later declared under house arrest.
Less than five years after wielding absolute power, the retired four-star general has become the latest example of the Pakistani judiciary’s increasing willingness to pursue previously untouchable levels of society — even to the top ranks of the powerful military.
Never before has a retired army chief faced imprisonment in Pakistan, and analysts said the move against Mr. Musharraf could open a new rift between the courts and the military.
All this comes at a delicate moment for Pakistan, with elections near and only a temporary caretaker government at the helm. Though army commanders have sworn to stay on the sidelines in this election, there is fear that any tension over Mr. Musharraf’s fate could make the military more politically aggressive.
It was perhaps with that potential conflict in mind that the country’s Supreme Court was reported by Mr. Musharraf’s aides to have designated his luxury villa — secured by both retired and serving soldiers — as a “sub-jail” late Thursday night rather than demanding that he appear outside the compound’s walls for arrest.
The tight security at his home, ringed by guard posts and barbed wire, was at first a reflection of repeated Taliban threats to kill the former general. But for now, the imminent danger to Mr. Musharraf, who ruled Pakistan between 1999 and 2008, stems from the courts.
At Thursday’s hearing, the High Court judge, Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, refused to extend Mr. Musharraf’s bail in a case focusing on his decision to fire and imprison the country’s top judges when he imposed emergency rule in November 2007.
Resentment toward the former army chief and president still runs deep in the judiciary, which was at the center of the heady 18-month protest movement that led to his ouster in 2008.
Mr. Musharraf’s All Pakistan Muslim League party hit back at the court, describing the order as “seemingly motivated by personal vendettas,” and hinted at the possibility of a looming clash with the military, warning that the order could “result in unnecessary tension among the various pillars of state and possibly destabilize the country.”
Mr. Musharraf’s lawyers immediately lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court, which rejected it. The legal team said it would try again on Friday.
The court drama represents the low point of a troubled homecoming for the swaggering commando general, who had vowed to “take the country out of darkness” after returning from four years of self-imposed exile in Dubai, London and the United States.
But instead of the public adulation he was apparently expecting, Mr. Musharraf has been greeted by stiff legal challenges, political hostility and — perhaps most deflating — a widespread sense of public apathy.
Pakistan’s influential television channels have given scant coverage to Mr. Musharraf since his return, and his party has struggled to find strong candidates to field in the general election scheduled for May 11. On Tuesday, the national election commission delivered another blow, disqualifying Mr. Musharraf from the election.
The army, once the source of Mr. Musharraf’s power, has offered little in the way of succor, apart from some armed security.
Meanwhile, Mr. Musharraf faces criminal charges in three cases dating to his period in office — the one related to firing judges and two others related to the deaths of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, a Baloch tribal leader. Attempts by some critics to charge Mr. Musharraf with treason have not succeeded.
At times, the self-described elite soldier seemed bent on shooting himself in the foot. In an interview with CNN last week, he admitted to having authorized American drone strikes in the tribal belt — a statement that contradicted years of denials of complicity in the drone program, and which was considered politically disastrous in a country where the drones are widely despised.
In returning home in such an apparently ill-considered manner, Mr. Musharraf has placed himself at the mercy of some of his most bitter enemies.
The favorite to win the coming election is Nawaz Sharif, the onetime prime minister whom Mr. Musharraf overthrew to seize power in 1999.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is led by his sworn enemy, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, whom Mr. Musharraf fired and placed under house arrest in 2007. Justice Siddiqui, who refused him bail on Thursday, is considered a conservative who has been hostile to the military.
Last week, another judge placed Mr. Musharraf on the Exit Control List, which means that he cannot leave the country until a court gives him permission.
In his 2006 memoir, “In the Line of Fire,” Mr. Musharraf wrote: “It is not unusual in Pakistan for the general public and the intelligentsia to approach the army chief and ask him to save the nation.” But as the events of Thursday suggested, it is the former army chief who may need saving this time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/w...sharraf-flees-courtroom-in-pakistan.html?_r=0
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — When the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf ended his years of exile last month, it was with a vision of himself as a political savior, returning
Instead, he contributed a new and bizarre chapter to the country’s political turmoil on Thursday, fleeing the halls of the High Court after a judge ordered his arrest. Speeding away in a convoy of black S.U.V.’s as a crowd of lawyers mocked him, he hurried to his fortress compound outside the capital, where he was later declared under house arrest.
Less than five years after wielding absolute power, the retired four-star general has become the latest example of the Pakistani judiciary’s increasing willingness to pursue previously untouchable levels of society — even to the top ranks of the powerful military.
Never before has a retired army chief faced imprisonment in Pakistan, and analysts said the move against Mr. Musharraf could open a new rift between the courts and the military.
All this comes at a delicate moment for Pakistan, with elections near and only a temporary caretaker government at the helm. Though army commanders have sworn to stay on the sidelines in this election, there is fear that any tension over Mr. Musharraf’s fate could make the military more politically aggressive.
It was perhaps with that potential conflict in mind that the country’s Supreme Court was reported by Mr. Musharraf’s aides to have designated his luxury villa — secured by both retired and serving soldiers — as a “sub-jail” late Thursday night rather than demanding that he appear outside the compound’s walls for arrest.
The tight security at his home, ringed by guard posts and barbed wire, was at first a reflection of repeated Taliban threats to kill the former general. But for now, the imminent danger to Mr. Musharraf, who ruled Pakistan between 1999 and 2008, stems from the courts.
At Thursday’s hearing, the High Court judge, Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, refused to extend Mr. Musharraf’s bail in a case focusing on his decision to fire and imprison the country’s top judges when he imposed emergency rule in November 2007.
Resentment toward the former army chief and president still runs deep in the judiciary, which was at the center of the heady 18-month protest movement that led to his ouster in 2008.
Mr. Musharraf’s All Pakistan Muslim League party hit back at the court, describing the order as “seemingly motivated by personal vendettas,” and hinted at the possibility of a looming clash with the military, warning that the order could “result in unnecessary tension among the various pillars of state and possibly destabilize the country.”
Mr. Musharraf’s lawyers immediately lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court, which rejected it. The legal team said it would try again on Friday.
The court drama represents the low point of a troubled homecoming for the swaggering commando general, who had vowed to “take the country out of darkness” after returning from four years of self-imposed exile in Dubai, London and the United States.
But instead of the public adulation he was apparently expecting, Mr. Musharraf has been greeted by stiff legal challenges, political hostility and — perhaps most deflating — a widespread sense of public apathy.
Pakistan’s influential television channels have given scant coverage to Mr. Musharraf since his return, and his party has struggled to find strong candidates to field in the general election scheduled for May 11. On Tuesday, the national election commission delivered another blow, disqualifying Mr. Musharraf from the election.
The army, once the source of Mr. Musharraf’s power, has offered little in the way of succor, apart from some armed security.
Meanwhile, Mr. Musharraf faces criminal charges in three cases dating to his period in office — the one related to firing judges and two others related to the deaths of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, a Baloch tribal leader. Attempts by some critics to charge Mr. Musharraf with treason have not succeeded.
At times, the self-described elite soldier seemed bent on shooting himself in the foot. In an interview with CNN last week, he admitted to having authorized American drone strikes in the tribal belt — a statement that contradicted years of denials of complicity in the drone program, and which was considered politically disastrous in a country where the drones are widely despised.
In returning home in such an apparently ill-considered manner, Mr. Musharraf has placed himself at the mercy of some of his most bitter enemies.
The favorite to win the coming election is Nawaz Sharif, the onetime prime minister whom Mr. Musharraf overthrew to seize power in 1999.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is led by his sworn enemy, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, whom Mr. Musharraf fired and placed under house arrest in 2007. Justice Siddiqui, who refused him bail on Thursday, is considered a conservative who has been hostile to the military.
Last week, another judge placed Mr. Musharraf on the Exit Control List, which means that he cannot leave the country until a court gives him permission.
In his 2006 memoir, “In the Line of Fire,” Mr. Musharraf wrote: “It is not unusual in Pakistan for the general public and the intelligentsia to approach the army chief and ask him to save the nation.” But as the events of Thursday suggested, it is the former army chief who may need saving this time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/w...sharraf-flees-courtroom-in-pakistan.html?_r=0
Rajput_Pakistani
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 1,149
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
I am not a law expert, but what i have asked from some lawyers and also heard it from different talk shows (serious analysts), following are the points, which should be considered while discussions.
1. This particular case in which Musharraf bail was cancelled is about Judges house arrest, its not that famous article 6 treason case.
2. This is a bailable offense, and any accuse who himself appear before the court has the right of bail. In other words, its kind of mandatory for court to grant bail.
3. Only those lawyers can take part in court proceedings, who are formally the part of either defense council or the lawyers of the party, who have filed the plea.
4. All over the world in judicial proceedings, neutrality of judges is utmost important. If in anyway, the hearing judge or judges are a party themselves, they transfer the case to neutral judges.
5. In no way, the judge should ever be sound or feel like taking side with any of the contesting party. Therefore judges usually never gave any remarks about any party what so ever. Its their final decision based on facts, proofs in the light of law, which speaks in the end.
6. FIR is needed to be registered by the suffered party against accused, which forms the base of the trial.
7. Judges themselves cannot include clauses during the course of the trial.
Now, keeping above points in mind, we can conclude very easy, that justice is not being properly served in the case of Musharraf.
* In this case, there is no FIR against Musharraf.
* Out of 60 Judges, who were allegedly arrested after 2007 emergency, none have filed a case or complaint against Musharraf.
* Obviously under the law, no 3rd party other then the actual sufferers can file a plea against the accused.
* The judge who heard the case was the Rawalpindi Bar president in 2007, he was heading lawyers movement against Musharraf. So, going by the principle of neutrality, he is not neutral and hence should not have hear the case in first place.
* During the hearings, Judge made specific remarks against Musharraf, hence take side with the plaintiff, which made him biased towards the defendant. No law of the world allows this that judge himself becomes a party, hence deny the defendant "the right of fair trial".
* During the court proceedings, as the judge clearly knew that he can not order Musharraf arrest in current scenario, he conveniently himself added "anti terrorism clauses" in the case, which is a non-bailable offense.
* It is customary for the courts all around the world to ensure an environment, where both plaintiff and accused feel secure, and no external pressure what so ever effects or pressurized the proceeding of the court. In this case as happened in past few days many times, a large number of lawyers from Islamabad / Rawalpindi bar gathered outside and within court room. They were chanting slogans against Musharraf, and many times tried to personally assaulted him. This is something against the honor of the court. If the accused and his defense council feel insecure even within court room, how can the justice be served.
The judge did nothing in this regard, instead he encourage the violent lawyers by allowing them to speak on the behalf of plaintiff. Those lawyers who were not part of proceedings actually spoke against accused, judge not only allowed them but also appreciate them. How on earth, such trend is being followed in Pakistani judiciary?
Example after example are coming of Judge gardi and Wukla gardi. Arslan Iftikhar case, TuQ case, Memo-gate and now Musharraf case. Judges are setting some dark examples, which will hurt Pakistan very badly in the course of the history. This is a country where persons like Sufi Mohammad and Maulana Abdul Aziz are set free by the courts. Shah Zain Bugti caught with truck loads of illegal weapons is set free. Traitors, who have vowed to take up arms against Pakistan aree given protocol in the name of justice, and former COAS and President is denied even a fair trial, this is Pakistan and sadly yes, i am its citizen.
PS 1: In Pakistani law, the president has immunity against any lawsuits, it includes all those orders which he passed during his tenure as President of Pakistan.
PS 2: Judges were in their houses, no body ever arrested them. There is not an order or witness produced by the plaintiff in this regard.
1. This particular case in which Musharraf bail was cancelled is about Judges house arrest, its not that famous article 6 treason case.
2. This is a bailable offense, and any accuse who himself appear before the court has the right of bail. In other words, its kind of mandatory for court to grant bail.
3. Only those lawyers can take part in court proceedings, who are formally the part of either defense council or the lawyers of the party, who have filed the plea.
4. All over the world in judicial proceedings, neutrality of judges is utmost important. If in anyway, the hearing judge or judges are a party themselves, they transfer the case to neutral judges.
5. In no way, the judge should ever be sound or feel like taking side with any of the contesting party. Therefore judges usually never gave any remarks about any party what so ever. Its their final decision based on facts, proofs in the light of law, which speaks in the end.
6. FIR is needed to be registered by the suffered party against accused, which forms the base of the trial.
7. Judges themselves cannot include clauses during the course of the trial.
Now, keeping above points in mind, we can conclude very easy, that justice is not being properly served in the case of Musharraf.
* In this case, there is no FIR against Musharraf.
* Out of 60 Judges, who were allegedly arrested after 2007 emergency, none have filed a case or complaint against Musharraf.
* Obviously under the law, no 3rd party other then the actual sufferers can file a plea against the accused.
* The judge who heard the case was the Rawalpindi Bar president in 2007, he was heading lawyers movement against Musharraf. So, going by the principle of neutrality, he is not neutral and hence should not have hear the case in first place.
* During the hearings, Judge made specific remarks against Musharraf, hence take side with the plaintiff, which made him biased towards the defendant. No law of the world allows this that judge himself becomes a party, hence deny the defendant "the right of fair trial".
* During the court proceedings, as the judge clearly knew that he can not order Musharraf arrest in current scenario, he conveniently himself added "anti terrorism clauses" in the case, which is a non-bailable offense.
* It is customary for the courts all around the world to ensure an environment, where both plaintiff and accused feel secure, and no external pressure what so ever effects or pressurized the proceeding of the court. In this case as happened in past few days many times, a large number of lawyers from Islamabad / Rawalpindi bar gathered outside and within court room. They were chanting slogans against Musharraf, and many times tried to personally assaulted him. This is something against the honor of the court. If the accused and his defense council feel insecure even within court room, how can the justice be served.
The judge did nothing in this regard, instead he encourage the violent lawyers by allowing them to speak on the behalf of plaintiff. Those lawyers who were not part of proceedings actually spoke against accused, judge not only allowed them but also appreciate them. How on earth, such trend is being followed in Pakistani judiciary?
Example after example are coming of Judge gardi and Wukla gardi. Arslan Iftikhar case, TuQ case, Memo-gate and now Musharraf case. Judges are setting some dark examples, which will hurt Pakistan very badly in the course of the history. This is a country where persons like Sufi Mohammad and Maulana Abdul Aziz are set free by the courts. Shah Zain Bugti caught with truck loads of illegal weapons is set free. Traitors, who have vowed to take up arms against Pakistan aree given protocol in the name of justice, and former COAS and President is denied even a fair trial, this is Pakistan and sadly yes, i am its citizen.
PS 1: In Pakistani law, the president has immunity against any lawsuits, it includes all those orders which he passed during his tenure as President of Pakistan.
PS 2: Judges were in their houses, no body ever arrested them. There is not an order or witness produced by the plaintiff in this regard.
Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
Your judges have been doing this for quite some time. It is just that their actions are only seen though the prism of the political dispensation that one supports. When they went after Zardari &the PM's. they were doing the very same. Only that people who disliked the PPP seemed to support such a move even if it was legally on questionable grounds. The same thing seems to be happening here. Musharraf seems to have walked himself into some sort of a trap.
- Status
Similar threads
