Panama leak Case Proceedings - JIT Report, News, Updates And Discussion

[Emmie]

Will another bench bhi constituted in this case??? I dont think so....

Judges had asked CJ to constitute monitoring/implementation bench....aur woh 3 member bench ban gaya....which has judges of majority verdict

Ab iske baad tu koi aur bench nahi banay gall, i think.. Ya tu JIt report is 3 member bench ke saamnay hi jayegi...ya phir..original 5 member bench ke pass... Sirf yeh decide hona hai ke un 2 judges ka vote count karay ga ya nahi? I dont think theres any question of any new bench being made, after implementation bench of 3 members... Ek hi new bench bannay ka kaha tha, CJ se aur woh ban gaya..



Ok.. Tell me...

Suppose one more judge disqualifies PM..then what will it mean? 3/5 judges disqualified PM...right? So it should mean his disqualification...

That's the prerogative of CJ, he'll decide which bench shall hear post-JIT case. If the same bench, the bench tasked to monitor JIT proceedings, continues to hear post-JIT case then to disqualify NS the judgement has to at least 2:1. Majority judges are there in monitoring bench because they didn't pass judgement in anyone's favor, ones who have passed the judgement on merits can't hear the case again unless the case is re-heard on review basis.

Justice Wajihuddin said..consider the verdict dated 20th april..as interim order..final verdict of which is yet to come.. Infact he was of the opinion at tht time( us waqt yeh implementation bench nahi bana tha) tht report of JIT will come back to the same 5 member bench and they will give final verdict again..

Uff bhtt confusion hai.. Kahin se pata karayein.. @PakSword aap bhi..koshish karein..

True as long as spirit of the judgement is deemed. The judgement passed on April 20th, enforceable and binding, is the judgement of the majority judges.

 

[Baghial]

the final verdict in panama corruption case........

 

[Emmie]

@Farah Sohail, let me make it plain, how can Justice Khosa and Justice Gulzar hear the case when they have already given their judgment on merits?

 

[Farah Sohail]

That's the prerogative of CJ, he'll decide which bench shall hear post-JIT case. If the same bench, the bench tasked to monitor JIT proceedings, continues to hear post-JIT case then to disqualify NS the judgement has to at least 2:1. Majority judges are there in monitoring bench because they didn't pass judgement in anyone's favor, ones who have passed the judgement on merits can't hear the case again unless the case is re-heard on review basis.

If this is really the case...then i think this 3 member bench will only decide... I dont think there will be any new bench constituted at all...

But again the same question.. If this 3 member bench will decide..these judges were part of 5 member bench.. These 3 didnt give any final verdict while 2 already gave their opinion on disqualification.. Now if one more judge decides to disqualify..it will mean 3 out of original 5 members disqualified NS... Heshould be disqualified then?

Also court order is ambigious in the sense tht it says tht judges can decide in matter of disqualification on receipt of either any periodical or final JIT report.. So what if one judge decides afte 2 JIT reports tht now its enough material for me to decide on disqualification....Will he be able to individually give verdict on disqualification at tht time?

@Farah Sohail, let me make it plain, how can Justice Khosa and Justice Gulzar hear the case when they have already given their judgment on merits?

Ok.. If they wont give verdict again.. But atleast their vote should be counted in disqualification? 2 out of 5? Nw one more judge makes 3 out of 5? This is what i am asking

 

[PakSword]

Uff bhtt confusion hai.. Kahin se pata karayein.. @PakSword aap bhi..koshish karein..

It is very clear.. Read below:

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

The JIT shall submit its periodical reports every two weeks before a Bench of this Court constituted in this behalf. The JIT shall complete the investigation and submit its final report before the said Bench within a period of sixty days from the date of its constitution. The Bench thereupon may pass appropriate orders in exercise of its powers under Articles 184(3), 187(2) and 190 of the Constitution including an order for filing a reference against respondent No. 1 and any other person having nexus with the crime if justified on the basis of the material thus brought on the record before it.

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

So, it's the implementation bench that will decide..

Qissa Khatam Paisa Hazam..

@Emmie

 

[Baghial]

It is very clear.. Read below:

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

The JIT shall submit its periodical reports every two weeks before a Bench of this Court constituted in this behalf. The JIT shall complete the investigation and submit its final report before the said Bench within a period of sixty days from the date of its constitution. The Bench thereupon may pass appropriate orders in exercise of its powers under Articles 184(3), 187(2) and 190 of the Constitution including an order for filing a reference against respondent No. 1 and any other person having nexus with the crime if justified on the basis of the material thus brought on the record before it.

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

So, it's the implementation bench that will decide..

Qissa Khatam Paisa Hazam..

@Emmie

 

[PakSword]

But again the same question.. If this 3 member bench will decide..these judges were part of 5 member bench.. These 3 didnt give any final verdict while 2 already gave their opinion on disqualification.. Now if one more judge decides to disqualify..it will mean 3 out of original 5 members disqualified NS... Heshould be disqualified then?

The other two decided on the basis of 62/63.

This bench is not looking into 62/63.. So their notes don't matter.

 

[Farah Sohail]

It is very clear.. Read below:

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

The JIT shall submit its periodical reports every two weeks before a Bench of this Court constituted in this behalf. The JIT shall complete the investigation and submit its final report before the said Bench within a period of sixty days from the date of its constitution. The Bench thereupon may pass appropriate orders in exercise of its powers under Articles 184(3), 187(2) and 190 of the Constitution including an order for filing a reference against respondent No. 1 and any other person having nexus with the crime if justified on the basis of the material thus brought on the record before it.

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

So, it's the implementation bench that will decide..

Qissa Khatam Paisa Hazam..

@Emmie

So it means majority of this 3 member bench will decide? Matlab 2-1 is needed at least?

Lekin mujhe confusion is liye hai ke this bench is part of the original 5 member bench.. Agar is bench main kuch new judges bhi hotay tu diff situation hoti.. Ab 3 member bench is part of original 5 member bench.. In main se agar kisi ek ne bhi keh diya ke NS disqualified tu baat yeh hogi na..ke 3 out of 5 members have now asked for disqualification... Yeh point mera hai.. Ye koi new bench tu hai nahi, usi ka part hai.. Tu phir tu sab kahein ge ke 3 out of 5 ne disqualify kardiya tu now he is disqulified.? What will be legal standing then? Aur phir PTI ka reaction kia hoga!?

The other two decided on the basis of 62/63.

This bench is not looking into 62/63.. So their notes don't matter.

Jab is bench ne disqualification consider karnay ko keh diya tu iska matlab hai ke 62/63 yahan bhi aagaya.. Agar inhon ne sirf criminality decide karni hoti ...tu 62/63 nahi aata but they have said they will consider dosqualification on receipt of either periodical or final JIT report.. Disqualification can only happen in 62/63 in this case

 

[PakSword]

Lekin mujhe confusion is liye hai ke this bench is part of the original 5 member bench..

I think Cheap justice haath kar gaya poori qaum se..

Although the members are the same, it is not a part of the original bench. Otherwise it should have been written in the order itself..

Chief justice ne 3 judges iss liey shamil kiey ke unhain poora case maloom hai, lekin uss gadhay ne baqi dono shamil nahi kiey purposely..

yeh haqeeqat khulay gi IK pe jab faisla aayega... Abhi Babar Awan aur baqi log bhi yehi samajh rahay hain ke aik aur chahiey... lekin aisa nahi hai..

 

[Farah Sohail]

I think Cheap justice haath kar gaya poori qaum se..

Although the members are the same, it is not a part of the original bench. Otherwise it should have been written in the order itself..

Chief justice ne 3 judges iss liey shamil kiey ke unhain poora case maloom hai, lekin uss gadhay ne baqi dono shamil nahi kiey purposely..

yeh haqeeqat khulay gi IK pe jab faisla aayega... Abhi Babar Awan aur baqi log bhi yehi samajh rahay hain ke aik aur chahiey... lekin aisa nahi hai..

Constituition petition no dekhein tu woh wohi const petition no 29 hi hai ..is monitoring bench ki..aur isay implementation bench kaha hai.. If it was entirky a new bench...tu constituition petition ka no change hojata l.. But itvwas said implementation bench aur petition number wohi hai jo original thee

 

[PakSword]

Jab is bench ne disqualification consider karnay ko keh diya tu iska matlab hai ke 62/63 yahan bhi aagaya.. Agar inhon ne sirf criminality decide karni hoti ...tu 62/63 nahi aata but they have said they will consider dosqualification on receipt of either periodical or final JIT report.. Disqualification can only happen in 62/63 in this case

62/63 ka case hi nahi raha yeh.. 62/63 pe tou already judges keh chukay hain ke moral pe nahi lagti legal pe lagti hai..

yeh parhain:

The Heads of the aforesaid departments/ institutions shall recommend the names of their nominees for the JIT within seven days from today which shall be placed before us in chambers for nomination and approval. The JIT shall investigate the case and collect evidence, if any, showing that respondent No. 1 or any of his dependents or benamidars owns, possesses or has acquired assets or any interest therein disproportionate to his known means of income. Respondents No. 1, 7 and 8 are directed to appear and associate themselves with the JIT as and when required. The JIT may also examine the evidence and material, if any, already available with the FIA and NAB relating to or having any nexus with the possession or acquisition of the aforesaid flats or any other assets or pecuniary resources and their origin.

 

[Farah Sohail]

62/63 ka case hi nahi raha yeh.. 62/63 pe tou already judges keh chukay hain ke moral pe nahi lagti legal pe lagti hai..

yeh parhain:

The Heads of the aforesaid departments/ institutions shall recommend the names of their nominees for the JIT within seven days from today which shall be placed before us in chambers for nomination and approval. The JIT shall investigate the case and collect evidence, if any, showing that respondent No. 1 or any of his dependents or benamidars owns, possesses or has acquired assets or any interest therein disproportionate to his known means of income. Respondents No. 1, 7 and 8 are directed to appear and associate themselves with the JIT as and when required. The JIT may also examine the evidence and material, if any, already available with the FIA and NAB relating to or having any nexus with the possession or acquisition of the aforesaid flats or any other assets or pecuniary resources and their origin.

Ohoo... Aap disqualification wala point parhein na.. Yeh wala nahi.. Disqualification tu 62/63 par hi hosakti hai.. J. Point aap ne yaahn paste kia hai..is ke result par thori disqualification hogi

 

[Emmie]

If this is really the case...then i think this 3 member bench will only decide... I dont think there will be any new bench constituted at all...

But again the same question.. If this 3 member bench will decide..these judges were part of 5 member bench.. These 3didbtvgive any final verdict while 2 already gave their opinion on disquakifcatin.. Now if one more judge decides to disqualify..it will mean 3 out of original 5 members disqualified NS... H should be disqualified then?

Also court order is ambigious in the sense tht it says tht judges can decide in matter of disqualification on receipt of either any periodical or final JIT report.. So what if one judge decides afte 2 JIT reports tht now its enough material for me to decide on disqualification....Will he be able to individually give verdict on disqualification at tht time?



Ok.. If they wont give verdict again.. But atleast their vote should be counted in disqualification? 2 out of 5? Nw one more judge makes 3 out of 5? This is what i am asking

First try to understand the basic fact relating to the judgement, minority judges' ruling is not enforceable, the legal status of NS as of now is that he's still a legal PM of Pakistan. But you're right there's confusion in the judgement, it doesn't specify whether the CPs are disposed off or still pending. If CPs are pending then more likely the majority judges will hear post-JIT proceedings and if CPs have been disposed off then most likely a new bench shall be constituted which may or may not have majority judges in it. Whatever the interpretations are, minority judges can't be part of any proceedings neither their votes will count. Any verdict now is subject to JIT report, the case will be decided on the report, please note a difference.

IMO we're done with the bench headed by Justice Khosa.

 

[Farah Sohail]

@PakSword isay aisay samjhein.e Justice Khosa aur Gulzar ne bhi tu criminal investigations aur proceedings start karnay ka kaha hai, with monitoring bench.. Lekin saath hi saath unhon ne 62/63 par bhi verdict de diya.. Ab yeh JIT ke baad bhi 3 judges bhi dono kaam saath karein ge.. This is what i think..ke disqualification ka matter JIT report ke baad decise karein ge on basis of 62/63 aur saath hi criminal cases bananay ka kahien ge shayad..

Because after receipt of JIT findings and verification of focuments..ab tak jo moral dishonesty thee, woh legal dishonesty main convert hojayegi..if JIT gives conclusive evidence against NS

First try to understand the basic fact relating to the judgement, minority judges' ruling is not enforceable, the legal status of NS as of now is that he's still a legal PM of Pakistan. But you're right there's confusion in the judgement, it doesn't specify whether the CPs are disposed off or still pending. If CPs are pending then more likely the majority judges will hear post-JIT proceedings and if CPs have been disposed off then most likely a new bench shall be constituted which may or may not have majority judges in it. Whatever the interpretations are, minority judges can't be part of any proceedings neither their votes will count. Any verdict now is subject to JIT report, the case will be decided on the report, please note a difference.

Read @PakSword post.. He quoted parts of court order.. Us se pata chalta hai ke 3 member bench hi decide karay ga,,. No new bench will be constituted, i think

 

[PakSword]

Ohoo... Aap disqualification wala point parhein na.. Yeh wala nahi.. Disqualification tu 62/63 par hi hosakti hai.. J. Point aap ne yaahn paste kia hai..is ke result par thori disqualification hogi

This is 63:

In the latter case when any question arises whether a member of Parliament has become disqualified it shall be dealt with only by the Election Commission on a reference from the Speaker of the Parliament in terms of Article 63(2) and 63(3) of the Constitution. (Emphasis supplied). We would have sent this case to the Speaker in terms of 63(2) or the Election Commission in terms of Article 63(3) of the Constitution but we do not think a question of such nature has arisen in this case as respondent No. 1 has been alleged to be disqualified even on the nomination day on account of having failed to disclose his assets and those of his dependents.