Pakistan – A History of Judicial Tyranny

By Shehryar Riaz Sheikh

26 April 2012 was another tragic day in our democratic history; the unanimously elected Prime Minister of Pakistan who in his wisdom ordered the release of the deposed Lordships of the Superior Courts immediately upon his election was convicted of Contempt of Court. Notwithstanding the uniqueness of NRO judgment condemning over 8000 accused without a hearing and the inherent selectivity of only targeting the President and his aides in the process, the overwhelming part of the judgment was implemented by the Federation of Pakistan. It is pertinent to mention that the grand strategist (of the “strategic depth” fame)–the promulgator of the infamous Ordinance luxuriously resides safe and secure from the wrath of law. Former Prime Minister Mohammad Khan Junejo and his almost 9 March’07 like moment of defiance during the notorious Zia regime is a case in point as to how an instance of individual heroism could not break the dictatorial chains. In case of the present dispensation, it was Benazir Bhutto’s sheer political maneuvering in striving for a political settlement, her ultimate sacrifice coupled with the sagacity of the political leadership along and the democratic struggle unleashed by the lawyers movement which paved way for the return of democracy to Pakistan. The present democratic dispensation is the sequel to NRO. History is bound to narrate as to how if had not been achieved, there would have been no elections, no assemblies, no free media and no free judiciary. The national leadership too would still have been languishing in exile.

The supreme court on the army and ISI chiefs’ removal

By Nasim Zehra

Excerpt;

….. The prime minister is within his constitutional authority to remove the two chiefs, and therefore under what law would the Chief Justice of Pakistan interfere in the prime minister’s authority and ask for a no-removal guarantee by the latter? Giving such a guarantee would clearly restrict the constitutional powers given to the elected prime minister. Was the CJP overstepping his constitutional mandate? The CJP can re-interpret or use his own discretion, but not without undermining the Constitution.

Such an action by the CJP could set a dangerous precedent and could undermine the recent thawing of government-army tensions. The Chief Justice of Pakistan is humbly advised to re-trace his missteps on this matter. Meanwhile, the government would be ill-advised to give in writing that it will not remove the army and the ISI chiefs.

Courtesy: The Express Tribune, January 25th, 2012.

Most of Pakistani diplomats are peeing in their pants, as to what kind of precedent is being set by their government in Lahore!

Sex, Rhetoric And Diplomatic Impunity

Islamabad is hard pressed to withdraw its ‘diplo-basher’. New Delhi is only too relieved.

by Seema Sirohi , Amir Mir

Even at the best of times, he is known to be acerbic and pungent as they come, his anti-India vitriol alarming to the uninitiated. But last month, Pakistan’s UN envoy, Munir Akram, directed his bile at his live-in girlfriend and in the process earned a big, black eye for his country. His dreadful conduct took the wind out of Pakistani sails as Islamabad began its tenure as a non-permanent member of the Security Council—and just as it was gearing to deliver some good rhetorical punches there on behalf of the world’s Muslims.

What could be more un-Islamic than a relationship outside wedlock which under Shariah is punishable by Taliban-style retribution?

Akram’s stars plunged precipitously as New York’s tabloids screamed details of Pakistan’s “diplo-basher” and “abuser”. The US State Department asked Islamabad to withdraw his diplomatic immunity so he could face criminal prosecution as a common man. The Pakistani establishment didn’t know what hit them, struggling, as they were, with other difficult aspects of their tortuous relationship with Uncle Sam—border shootings and bombs dropping from American planes. They didn’t need a new complication from one of their own. The famed corridors of the United Nations were suddenly abuzz with talk of Akram’s physical, not verbal, violence. …

Read more : OutLook