What's new

Panama Case - Post Verdict Discussion and Updates

Please give more information..

2 out of 3 from Hudaibiya neutralized? I heard the same that's why I said that the decision will be 2-1 against Hudaibiya reopening. But it seems now all 3 have been neutralized.

About which judge you are surprised?

I have heard that at least 8 are still at odds.. Why do you think that in the end only two are the outliers?

Based on info received- yes, 2 from Hudaibiya - you can easily guess those two. Contempt ke shaukeen waley Sahib has gone way ahead. Nihal Hashmi ke tou qaseedey parh rahey hain aur NAB prosecutor ko Justice Khosa ke decision pey mirchain lag rahi hain. Game is on - $ and £ at work.

Two other names included those who aren’t fond of Irfan Mangi.

Work is still in progress on others, stage is being set to fire a shot through IHC - as that’s where the brief cases work most effectively - High court judges picked from Bar are the usual takers of brief cases that we all know - personal experience too!

I hope its not the Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as then it will be impossible for the cases to proceed.

That’s the name I am not buying as of now.

————

Lastly, take a look at this

8CDBC4C9-FB64-413D-AB33-FD0C0247E92D.jpeg
086C468E-1D19-4DC6-BFA1-1B06B5F92993.jpeg
 
.
Based on info received- yes, 2 from Hudaibiya - you can easily guess those two. Contempt ke shaukeen waley Sahib has gone way ahead. Nihal Hashmi ke tou qaseedey parh rahey hain aur NAB prosecutor ko Justice Khosa ke decision pey mirchain lag rahi hain. Game is on - $ and £ at work.

Two other names included those who aren’t fond of Irfan Mangi.

Work is still in progress on others, stage is being set to fire a shot through IHC - as that’s where the brief cases work most effectively - High court judges picked from Bar are the usual takers of brief cases that we all know - personal experience too!

2 out of 3 from hudaibya bench? Who is the odd one out? Head of hudaibya bench?

2 other judges woh arent fond of Irfan Mangi... one..of them is in hudaibya bench too na.....as u said contempt ke shauqeen walay sahab.. qazi Faez Isa and Justice Dost Muhammad..both insulted Irfan Mangi...yes..i had already guessed them both...
But this makes 3 judges..if we take head of hudaibya bench out.. as u said 2 out of 3 from hudiabya bench..

Who is the fourth one?

That's the name I am not buying as of now

You are right.. CJ isnt possible...

Anyone who has read IK's verdict wont believe this.. if he did even have an ounce of sympathy for NS.....he wouldnt have written IK's verdict the way he did..esp the part where he differentiated between panama case and IK case.. kafi insult ki...CJ Saqib Nisar ne ..NS ki....

And then CJ Saqib Nisar's speech .. Saqib Nisar cant be in those 5

Another scathing comments on NAB by Justice Gulzar - I guess only two out of 17 are capable of calling spade a spade and truly say what the truth is and glaring right at every conscientious countrymans face, rest become too suave to the point where their efficacy as a last resort for provision of justice gets diluted - severely!


No doubt tht Justice Khosa and Gulzar are the best... un dono ka koi match nahi..

But i think all panama case judges are good..

Also IK's case judges are also good...and Justice Maqbool Baqar who dissented in orange train verdict..

So i think 5 panama judges + 3 Ik's case's judges+ J Maqbool Baqar...=9 judges... i think atleast these 9 judges are honest and trustworthy
 
.
That’s the name I am not buying as of now.

I have a different information about CJ.. that he will issue a contempt in the coming days/ months if Mr. NS and his daughter continue with their rants against judiciary..

But now since you have updated us, it is quite possible he has sold his conscience for a few bucks..
 
.
Just watched the clip that @Shane shared and it does show CJ Saqib Nisar has been bias towards PMLN and have favored them on so many occasions, there may be more than meets the eye on @Realistic Change info.

As Shane said:
Watch from 25:58 - 29:00 and then 30:35 - 34:50
 
. . . . . .
2 out of 3 from hudaibya bench? Who is the odd one out? Head of hudaibya bench?

2 other judges woh arent fond of Irfan Mangi... one..of them is in hudaibya bench too na.....as u said contempt ke shauqeen walay sahab.. qazi Faez Isa and Justice Dost Muhammad..both insulted Irfan Mangi...yes..i had already guessed them both...
But this makes 3 judges..if we take head of hudaibya bench out.. as u said 2 out of 3 from hudiabya bench..

Who is the fourth one?



You are right.. CJ isnt possible...

Anyone who has read IK's verdict wont believe this.. if he did even have an ounce of sympathy for NS.....he wouldnt have written IK's verdict the way he did..esp the part where he differentiated between panama case and IK case.. kafi insult ki...CJ Saqib Nisar ne ..NS ki....

And then CJ Saqib Nisar's speech .. Saqib Nisar cant be in those 5




No doubt tht Justice Khosa and Gulzar are the best... un dono ka koi match nahi..

But i think all panama case judges are good..

Also IK's case judges are also good...and Justice Maqbool Baqar who dissented in orange train verdict..

So i think 5 panama judges + 3 Ik's case's judges+ J Maqbool Baqar...=9 judges... i think atleast these 9 judges are honest and trustworthy

I won’t name - but you have nailed it :)

Actually another 2 of them haven’t played any part as yet - Nawaz attempting to file reviews / clubbing of references etc in the hopes that maybe bench gets configured the same way Hudaibiya one was formed.

So in total 6 - which includes the one that I do not agree but as discussed before maybe he was 49% fair and 51% pro Nawaz now he has gone 51% fair :)
 
.
I won’t name - but you have nailed it :)

Actually another 2 of them haven’t played any part as yet - Nawaz attempting to file reviews / clubbing of references etc in the hopes that maybe bench gets configured the same way Hudaibiya one was formed.

Another 2? Ohoo... ab ye 2 kon hain? Uff koi hint dein

So in total 6 - which includes the one that I do not agree but as discussed before maybe he was 49% fair and 51% pro Nawaz now he has gone 51% fair :)

Yes.. CJ is fair now..

Its clear from the way....he has written IK verdict... he could have given the same verdict...(tht is not disqualifying IK)...but there was no need for him to discuss panama case in sooo much detail...and insult NS the way he did in IK case....bohatt insult ki..NS ki........cant say abt past..but atleast now..CJ doesnt seem to have any sympathy for NS... and then his speech the next day..
 
.
Another 2? Ohoo... ab ye 2 kon hain? Uff koi hint dein



Yes.. CJ is fair now..

Its clear from the way....he has written IK verdict... he could have given the same verdict...(tht is not disqualifying IK)...but there was no need for him to discuss panama case in sooo much detail...and insult NS the way he did in IK case....bohatt insult ki..NS ki........cant say abt past..but atleast now..CJ doesnt seem to have any sympathy for NS... and then his speech the next day..

Yep - so it seems!

Had he (Nawaz) not pushed his luck too much - he would have got it.

2 you’ll know if Nawaz gets lucky and any of his petitions lands up in a new bench.
 
.
Yep - so it seems!

Had he (Nawaz) not pushed his luck too much - he would have got it.

2 you’ll know if Nawaz gets lucky and any of his petitions lands up in a new bench.

Waisy CJ ne hi in chamber hearing main NS ki petition reject ki... hopefully ab bhi kardein
Woh 2 new judges ka koi hint dein jinhon ne ab tak koi role play nahi kia?
 
. .
I dont know if everyone here has read Justice Khosa's note in Yousuf Raza Gilani's case....but everyone MUST read it.. infact if you have even read it earlier.. MUST read it again...its SOOOO relevant today...

-----------------------------------

Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J.: I have had the privilege of going through the proposed judgment authored by my learned brother Nasir-ul-Mulk, J. and I am in respectful agreement with the same. I would, however, add the following note to the proposed judgment.

2. In the context of the case in hand I am reminded of the following unforgettable words of Khalil Gibran that paint a picture which unfortunately appears quite familiar:

Pity the Nation

Pity the nation that is full of beliefs and empty of religion.

Pity the nation that wears a cloth it does not weave,
eats a bread it does not harvest,
and drinks a wine that flows not from its own wine-press.

Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero, and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful.

Pity the nation that despises a passion in its dream,

Pity the nation that raises not its voice
save when it walks in a funeral,
boasts not except among its ruins,
and will rebel not save when its neck is laid between the sword and the block.

Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox,
whose philosopher is a juggler,
and whose art is the art of patching and mimicking.

Pity the nation that welcomes its new ruler with trumpeting, and farewells him with hooting,
only to welcome another with trumpeting again.

Pity the nation whose sages are dumb with years and whose strong men are yet in the cradle.

Pity the nation divided into fragments, each fragment deeming itself a nation.

3. With an apology to Khalil Gibran, and with reference to the present context, I may add as follows:

Pity the nation that achieves nationhood in the name of a religion but pays little heed to truth, righteousness and accountability which are the essence of every religion.

Pity the nation that proclaims democracy as its polity but restricts it to queuing up for casting of ballots only and discourages democratic values.

Pity the nation that measures honour with success
and respect with authority,
that despises sublime and cherishes mundane,
that treats a criminal as a hero and considers civility as weakness and that deems a sage a fool and venerates the wicked.


Pity the nation that adopts a Constitution
but allows political interests to outweigh constitutional diktat.


Pity the nation that demands justice for all
but is agitated when justice hurts its political loyalty.


Pity the nation whose servants treat their solemn oaths
as nothing more than a formality before entering upon an office.


Pity the nation that elects a leader as a redeemer
but expects him to bend every law to favour his benefactors.


Pity the nation whose leaders seek martyrdom through disobeying the law than giving sacrifices for the glory of law
and who see no shame in crime.


Pity the nation that is led by those
who laugh at the law
little realizing that the law shall have the last laugh.


Pity the nation that launches a movement for rule of law but cries foul when the law is applied against its bigwig, that reads judicial verdicts through political glasses
and that permits skills of advocacy to be practised
more vigorously outside the courtroom than inside.


Pity the nation that punishes its weak and poor but is shy of bringing its high and mighty to book.

Pity the nation that clamours for equality before law but has selective justice close to its heart.

Pity the nation that thinks from its heart
and not from its head.


Indeed, pity the nation
that does not discern villainy from nobility.


4. I must clarify that I do not want to spread despair or despondency and it may be appreciated that no reform or improvement is possible until the ills or afflictions are identified and addressed. The respondent’s conduct in this case regrettably appears to be symptomatic of a bigger malady which, if allowed to remain
unchecked or uncured, may overwhelm or engulf all of us as a nation and I recall here what Johne Donne had written:

Each man’s death diminishes me, For I am involved in mankind. Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,

It tolls for thee.

5. Khalil Gibran had also harped on a somewhat similar theme as under:

On Crime and Punishment

Oftentimes have I heard you speak of one who commits a wrong as though he were not one of you, but a stranger unto you and an intruder upon your world.
But I say that even as the holy and the righteous cannot rise beyond the highest which is in each one of you,

So the wicked and the weak cannot fall lower than the lowest which is in you also.
And as a single leaf turns not yellow but with the silent knowledge of the whole tree,

So the wrong-doer cannot do wrong without the hidden will of you all.
Like a procession you walk together towards your god-self.
You are the way and the wayfarers.

And when one of you falls down he falls for those behind him, a caution against the stumbling stone.
Ay, and he falls for those ahead of him, who though faster and surer of foot, yet removed not the stumbling stone.

And this also, though the word lie heavy upon your hearts: The murdered is not unaccountable for his own murder, And the robbed is not blameless in being robbed.
The righteous is not innocent of the deeds of the wicked, And the white-handed is not clean in the doings of the felon. Yea, the guilty is oftentimes the victim of the injured,

And still more often the condemned is the burden bearer for the guiltless and unblamed.
You cannot separate the just from the unjust and the good from the wicked;

For they stand together before the face of the sun even as the black thread and the white are woven together.
And when the black thread breaks, the weaver shall look into the whole cloth, and he shall examine the loom also.

6. I deem it important and relevant to explain here the conceptual basis of the law regarding contempt of court. The power to punish a person for committing contempt of court is primarily a power of the people of this country to punish such person for contemptuous conduct or behavior displayed by him towards the courts created by the people for handling the judicial functions of the State and such power of the people has been entrusted or delegated by the people to the courts through the Constitution. It must never be lost sight of that the ultimate ownership of the Constitution and of the organs and institutions created thereunder as well as of all the powers of such organs and institutions rests with the people of the country who have adopted the Constitution and have thereby created all the organs and institutions established under it. It may be advantageous to reproduce here the relevant words of the Preamble to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973:

“we, the people of Pakistan ------- Do hereby, through our representatives in the National Assembly, adopt, enact and give to ourselves, this Constitution.”

It is, thus, obvious that a person defying a judicial verdict in fact defies the will of the people at large and the punishment meted out to him for such recalcitrant conduct or behavior is in fact inflicted upon him not by the courts but by the people of the country themselves acting through the courts created and established by them. It may be well to remember that the constitutional balance vis-à-vis trichotomy and separation of powers between the Legislature, the Judiciary and the Executive is very delicately poised and if in a given situation the Executive is bent upon defying a final judicial verdict and is ready to go to any limit in such defiance, including taking the risk of bringing down the constitutional structure itself, then in the final analysis it would be the responsibility of the people themselves to stand up for defending the Constitution and the organs and institutions created and established thereunder and for dealing with the delinquent appropriately. It shall simply be naïve to underestimate the power of the people in matters concerning enforcement of their will. The recent phenomenon known as the Arab Spring is too fresh to be ignored or forgotten. Going back a little, when told about the Pope’s anger over
the ruthless Stalinist suppression of dissent within Russia Joseph Stalin dismissively made a scornful query “The Pope? How many divisions does he have?" History tells us that the will of the Russian people ultimately prevailed over the Soviet Union’s army of countless divisions. A page from our own recent history reminds us that the Chief Justice of Pakistan did not possess or control any division when he refused to obey the unconstitutional dictates of General Pervez Musharraf, who commanded quite a few divisions, and still emerged victorious with the help of the people. The lesson to be learnt is that if the cause is constitutional and just then the strength and support for the same is received from the people at large who are the ultimate custodians of the Constitution. I am not too sure as to how many divisions would a population of over 180 million make!

7. The respondent is the Chief Executive of our Federation who has openly and brazenly defied the Constitutional and legal mandate regarding compliance of and obedience to this Court’s judgments and orders. The following words of Justice Louis Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Olmstead v. United States (227 U.S. 438, 485) seem to be quite apt to a situation like this:

“In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

The respondent is our elected representative and our Prime Minister and in his conviction lies our collective damnation. This surely calls for serious introspection. I believe that the proposed judgment authored by my learned brother Nasir-ul-Mulk, J. is a step towards the right direction as it kindles a flame of hope for a future for our nation which may establish a just and fair order, an order wherein the law rules and all citizens are equal before the law.

----------------------------

@PakSword @Realistic Change @Shane @Dil Pakistan Must read it again..even if u have read it earlier...
 
.
Back
Top Bottom