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

[Emmie]

How can it be a constitutional issue if it's not part of the constitution? There is nothing which prevents someone from holding a public office even if there is conflict of interest.

There's no constitutional bar on dual national to run for elections in Pakistan yet SC ruled dual national can't run for elections in Pakistan.Constitution if doesn't bar PM to do a job abroad then it doesn't allow either, that said it's a constitutional matter especially when considered in context with bar on Judges and other government officials.

Waisay lack of law on conflict of interest will go in favor of NS. This is my opinion.. SC ruling de dey agar NS ke khilaaf, qanoon ke clear na hotay huay, it doesn't seem possible. So many other things, uss par abhi tak mind nahi ban raha..

I remember, I developed a bad habit while playing carrom board in my childhood. I used to hesitate a lot and pushed myself back while trying to hit the striker after aiming at the coins. Sometimes, the hesitation kept me from playing a shot at all.

Mujhay SC ki halat aisi hi lag rahi hai..

If SC is all set to exonerate NS then nothing can stop it.

 

[expert]

There's no constitutional bar on dual national to run for elections in Pakistan yet SC ruled dual national can't run for elections in Pakistan.Constitution if doesn't bar PM to do a job abroad then it doesn't allow either, that said it's a constitutional matter especially when considered in context with bar on Judges and other government officials.



If SC is all set to exonerate NS then nothing can stop it.

There is a bar on a dual national from being a member of Parliament.

(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan, or acquires the citizenship of a foreign State; or

https://pakistanconstitutionlaw.com...for-membership-of-majlis-e-shoora-parliament/

 

[Emmie]

There is a bar on a dual national from being a member of Parliament.

It says who ceases to be a Pakistani it doesn't say about dual national, a dual national is still a Pakistani.

Want to read a long judgement of Justice Chaudhry?

 

[expert]

If SC is all set to exonerate NS then nothing can stop it.

The law is supposed to. If the judges can justify their ruling, we will be bound to accept it whether we think it's right or wron

It says who ceases to be a Pakistani it doesn't say about dual national, a dual national is still a Pakistani.

Want to read a long judgement of Justice Chaudhry?

"or acquires the citizenship of a foreign State"
Here is the judgement on the dual nationality case:
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/ConstP5of2012_dt_20092012.pdf

because of their disqualification under Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution

Article c means
(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan, or acquires the citizenship of a foreign State; or



Nawaz Sharif has been compromised. The fact that the UK and Saudia Arabia haven't replied to MLA requests means that they have vested interests in keeping Nawaz Sharif in power. If his foreign accounts was are confirmed he's a goner. Now, these countries will be able to get more things done by blackmailing Nawaz Sharif. Unfortunately, if these judges don't have the guts to disqualify, we will remain a colony by proxy though Nawaz Sharif and his children for many years to come.

 

[Emmie]

The law is supposed to. If the judges can justify their ruling, we will be bound to accept it whether we think it's right or wron


"or acquires the citizenship of a foreign State"
Here is the judgement on the dual nationality case:
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/ConstP5of2012_dt_20092012.pdf



Article c means
(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan, or acquires the citizenship of a foreign State; or

You're not getting. Statement that one who ceases to be a Pakistani is at par with statement that one who acquires a citizenship of a foreign state. In both the statements the person is not a Pakistani anymore whereas the dual national is a foreign national as well as a Pakistani national. Spot the difference.

 

[expert]

You're not getting. Statement that one who ceases to be a Pakistani is at par with statement that one who acquires a citizenship of a foreign state. In both the statements the person is not a Pakistani anymore whereas the dual national is a foreign national as well as a Pakistani national. Spot the difference.

Not true. The entire judgement of the dual nationality case is based on 63(1)(c) of the constitution. It doesn't matter if the person is a Pakistani citizen or not. The moment he acquires a second citizenship he is ineligible to become an MNA/MPA.

The Supreme Court can't make a ruling on something that is not in the constitution.
The judgement begins

IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ. — This petition has been filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution with the prayer that the Parliamentarians having dual citizenship may be declared to be disqualified in terms of Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution read with section 14 of the Pakistan Citizenship Act, 1951.

 

[FlyingAce]

How about the Oath of the PM
It States "That I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions"
His personal interest is clearly visible, "Conflict of Interest" is there,,,

 

[expert]

Reading the dual national judgement, if anyone wants to know what will happen when this goes to a trial court:

As Mr. A. Rehman Malik had made false declarations while filing his nomination papers before the Election Commission in the election held in the year 2008, therefore, the Election Commission is directed to institute Constitution Petition No.05/2012 14 legal proceedings against him as it has been directed in the case of above said parliamentarians

Nothing happened to Rehman Malik for fraud, forgery and perjury. Nothing will happen to Nawaz Sharif. PML and PPP is the same thing.

How about the Oath of the PM
It States "That I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions"
His personal interest is clearly visible, "Conflict of Interest" is there,,,

Someone will have to prove that his personal interests influenced his official conduct. Just saying "could have influenced" will not be enough.

 

[Farah Sohail]

Here I agree with you.. Undeclared bank account is a bigger threat for NS.. Thanks for reminding me..

Main confidence lose karchuka hun already.. Dawn Leaks ke episode ke baad..

Mera nahi khyal ke NS ke bach janay ka koi chance hai... Undeclared bank accounts, conflict of interest on dubai job..qatari letter, jhoot....no money trial..forged docs..maryam beneficial pwner proved...what else is reqd for disqualification?

Now..has it been proved tht these docs whivh are now shown on media..were they submitted to SC, and JIT, before or not? @Emmie

Aur doosri baat ye ke PML N jo ab dey rahi hai..aguments/docs ..ye pehle kiun nahi diye..jab Kh Haris arguments de rahay thay? Why on last day? SC hasnt even accepted and made these docs, part of record..agar ye wohi hain, jo Kh Haris end main laaye thay?

Ye docs waisa hi twist tu nahi jo 2 days pehle Hussain nawaz ke docs thay ke game changer hain...aur SC ne aisi taisi kar di thee..un docs ki?

 

[FlyingAce]

Again i'd say in the past SCP has disqualified Benazir Bhutto Govt on Prima Facie of committed Corruption, in the end Judges would need to be Bold enough to make that decision of invoking 62/63!

 

[Emmie]

Not true. The entire judgement of the dual nationality case is based on 63(1)(c) of the constitution. It doesn't matter if the person is a Pakistani citizen or not. The moment he acquires a second citizenship he is ineligible to become an MNA/MPA.

The Supreme Court can't make a ruling on something that is not in the constitution.

Obviously the judgement has to be based on 63(1)(1), for it was the article which was invoked.

It doesn't matter if the person is a Pakistani citizen or not. The moment he acquires a second citizenship he is ineligible to become an MNA/MPA

That's the interpretation of the 63(1)(1), otherwise there's no direct constitutional bar on dual national. Exactly what I said earlier, it was SC which interpreted law.

As for SC's inability to rule on matter not discussed in constitution, I tend to disagree, every reported judgement sets a precedent for matters not explained in law. We follow caselaw my dear friend.

 

[Farah Sohail]

Yahan SC kahegi ke hamain qanoon ke mutabiq faisla karna hai..

Justice Ijazul Ahsan has already said tht he would go for complete justice, instead of technical justice

 

[expert]

Justice Ijazul Ahsan has already said tht he would go for complete justice, instead of technical justice

It will be interesting to see what he means by that.

 

[Farah Sohail]

But there is no law which restricts as well? What do you think?

Sheikh rashid argued...ke phir tu PM ko agar koi enemy agency hire kar ley..phir?

 

[Emmie]

Now..has it been proved tht these docs whivh are now shown on media..were they submitted to SC, and JIT, before or not? @Emmie

Yes! JIT was provided with all the record, same is true for PTI.