Politics is really an intresting subject. It is not every tom, dick and hery’s domain. There is no straight black and white. lesser evil theory is the the outcome of it. there has never been an ideal situation or position in politics. It id an art of incremental and gradual development. There are countless grey areas to deal in it. that’s why visionary leadership is always required to demonstrate statesmanship to deal with the situation.

we condemn PMLN leader Mian Nawaz Sharif’s statement of military courts in Sindh. yes we know that MQM is anti-Sindh but as a matter of principle Sindhis will never support any military intervention in any sphere of political discourse in any part of Pakistan. But simultaneously Sindh supports Mian Saheb’s stand on province and welcome his warning that MQM ultimately wants to divide Sindh. and Sindh must get ready to resist. Sindh doesn’t like Mian Saheb’s tilt to religious and anti-liberal forces but Sindh respects his stand on security establishment.

Sindh and other nations feel that the security and civil bureaucracy dominated by Punjab is the core culprit of all the evils in Pakistan but it was again Punjab who stood up against the worst military dicctator Musharraf and throw him out after lawyers march and citizens movement. So this time same ‘exploiter’ Punjab became savor of the democracy and rule of people.


An eye -opener article on radicalized Pakistan

COMMENT: Nationalism, patriots and traitors – By Muhammad Ahsan Yatu

Those who differed with the rulers’ methods of running the state were declared traitors. No wonder within months after its inception Pakistan stood divided between the ‘patriots’ and the ‘traitors’. This divide still continues

Continue reading An eye -opener article on radicalized Pakistan

Of memogate and precedence – By Waris Husain

As Habib Jalib said, “How can this desert be called a rose garden? How can I write a silver lining of this cloud? We have inherited this grief from the past, how can I write this grief anew?”

Critics argue that the Supreme Court’s decision to continue its probe of Memogate is a replay of past judgments which legitimised the will of the military over the people’s civilian government. Others contend that the will of the people demands that Zardari and his cohorts be punished in any manner for corruption, and the Supreme Court’s decision is one step in that political fight.

Though the Supreme Court judges and the Lawyer’s Movement acted as a political force to remove Musharraf, they should reexamine their roles in the battle for constitutional supremacy today. The Court has a valid interest in applying the rule of law equally to all, including Presidents and former Ambassadors, but they must also recognise the context of that judgment. The law, unlike politics, is powerful only when it follows precedent, and the precedent being set by the court today is quite a dangerous one for the future of civilian-military relations.

The Supreme Court’s order calls for a three judge panel to collect evidence and present findings within one month. In the Order, the Supreme Court stated that it was protecting fundamental rights recognised in Articles 9, 14, and 19A of the Constitution. These articles protect the right to due process, dignity of man, right to information of matters of public importance.

Continue reading Of memogate and precedence – By Waris Husain