Some of our readers have already commented on this here. However, it would be premature to comment at this early stage as no details have been given.
The facts are that the President has suspended Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and appointed Justice Javed Iqbal as acting chief justice. He has taken this action on the basis of “numerous complaints and serious allegations for misconduct, misuse of authority and actions prejudicial to the dignity of office of the chief justice of Pakistan,” the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan news agency reported. Obviously, this was after the CJ was given an opportunity to give a satisfactory explanation to the President and the Prime Minister.
We had posted an open letter by Advocate Naeem Bokhari a few days ago which criticised his behaviour towards the Pakistan Bar Association. Was there any truth in it? Or was it part of a planned, staged and smoothly executed, albeit unpleasant, removal?
There have been contrasting views on this in mainstream Pakistani media from political analysts, retired judges and members of the opposition. Most agree, however, that the President was well within his powers to take such an action. Many are not sure of the basis or grounds for such an action. International Herald Tribune reports:
Meanwhile, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, a hard-line opposition leader in the National Assembly, condemned Chaudhry’s removal and urged the opposition parties to back the sacked chief justice “to protect the judiciary from a dictator (Musharraf).”
Former Chief Justice Saeed-ul Zaman Saddiqui told Geo TV Chaudhry’s removal was “unfortunate,” but that Musharraf had the power to act against Chaudhry.
Wajihuddin Ahmad, a retired judge, said Chaudhry was “convicted and punished without trial.”
“He (Chaudhry) was an upright person, and the action against him has surprised me,” said Abdul Qayyum, a retired judge who now works as a lawyer.
Recent rulings by Chaudhry may have irked the government.
Last June, the Supreme Court rejected a government move to sell 75 percent of state-owned Pakistan Steel Mills to a Saudi-Russian-Pakistani consortium for 21.7 billion rupees (US$362 million). Mill workers claimed it was greatly undervalued.
Also, Chaudhry has heard a landmark case brought by relatives of dozens of people believed taken into secret custody by Pakistani intelligence agencies. He had pressed the government to provide information on the detainees’ whereabouts.
Talat Masood, a political analyst, said the removal of Chaudhry demonstrated the power of the military and suggested that Musharraf’s government wanted to have a “pliable judiciary” ahead of parliamentary elections expected later this year.
Musharraf, who took power in a bloodless coup in 1999, is widely expected to seek another five-year term as president from Parliament later this year.
Geo News video link. High speed connection required. Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Raja Zafar ul Haq, Muhammad Ali Durrani all speak.
Dawn reports:
President Gen. Pervez Musharraf on Friday filed a reference against the Chief Justice of Pakistan under article 209 of the country’s constitution on charges of misconduct and misuse of authority, Information Minister Mohammad Ali Durrani said. Musharraf has now referred the case of chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), Durrani said. “The president has taken the action after numerous complaints and having personally heard the chief justice. He has acted under the constitutional requirement,” Durrani said. An official statement said Musharraf had appointed Javed Iqbal, another senior supreme court judge, to replace Chaudhry.
The statement said “the chief justice was called by the president and the prime minister and confronted with the allegations, in answer to which he could not give any satisfactory reply.” Justice Chaudhry is now “non-functional”, Law Minister Muhammad Wasi Zafar claimed in an interview to a private TV channel. The SJC has now summoned Justice Chaudhry on March 13th to face the charges filed against him by the president, a private channel TV report added.
This is shameful for Pakistan and for people who love Pakistan. There couldnt be a more balatant violation of consititution of the country.
Let’s pray that we as a nation may be united against the forces of darkness.
Note: this comment deals with the ‘law’, and the not the political undertones that accompanies this news. I would vehemently disagree with most of what has already been said, because it is based on a deep-seated misunderstanding of how this has actually gone about [unless of course my interpretation is wrong]. Though, humbly, I doubt this is the case- refer to
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?171467
(1) The President did not ‘fire’ or ‘suspend’ the chief justice as has been stated by Hakim and Khuldun; instead:
(2) The President filed an Article 209 reference under the Constitution [which he is ‘entitled’ as the ‘President’. [Of course, I question that status, but under the current law that is the case].
Article 209 deals with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) which looks into the (1) conduct of the judge or/and (2) capability of the judge to perform his duties [in case of physical or mental incapacity]. Under Article 209(5) the President of Pakistan may direct the SJC to inquire into a matter where there ‘may’ have been misconduct on the part of the judge. The information regarding this, under the constitution may come from ANY source. Further, under Article 209(6) if the SJC considers that that is the case AND that he should be removed from office, the President may remove the judge from office.
However, from my limited internet sources, again, doubt arises by way of the fact that Article 209(5) was promulgated by way of the famous ‘Legal Framework Order 2002’ of our current President. I am unclear as to this, so if someone has information re: this, it would be appreciated.
(3) It is the SJC that has barred the Chief Justice from taking part in any judicial activity pending the result of the inquiry. The question as to the President ‘firing’ him does not arise in any case since the SJC has effectively ‘suspended’ the Chief Justice.
Therefore, the outcome of this is entirely dependant on the SJC as you might have noted from Article 209(6) of the Constitution. If an outcome is reached whereby in the end the Chief Justice is dismissed, I am sorry but there is no one else to blame but the 5 MOST senior judges that sit on the SJC. If you say, that they are ‘puppets’ of the President, then that says a lot about the judiciary of the country and the man who has been leading them until recently (a.k.a the Chief Justice). If the President goes against the decision of the SJC then he will be (potentially) in breach of Article 209(7) of the Constitution.
Note: this comment deals with the ‘law’, and the not the political undertones that accompanies this news. I would vehemently disagree with most of what has already been said, because it is based on a deep-seated misunderstanding of how this has actually gone about [unless of course my interpretation is wrong]. Though, humbly, I doubt this is the case- refer to
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?171467
(1) The President did not ‘fire’ or ‘suspend’ the chief justice as has been stated by Hakim and Khuldun; instead:
(2) The President filed an Article 209 reference under the Constitution [which he is ‘entitled’ as the ‘President’. [Of course, I question that status, but under the current law that is the case].
Article 209 deals with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) which looks into the (1) conduct of the judge or/and (2) capability of the judge to perform his duties [in case of physical or mental incapacity]. Under Article 209(5) the President of Pakistan may direct the SJC to inquire into a matter where there ‘may’ have been misconduct on the part of the judge. The information regarding this, under the constitution may come from ANY source. Further, under Article 209(6) if the SJC considers that that is the case AND that he should be removed from office, the President may remove the judge from office.
However, from my limited internet sources, again, doubt arises by way of the fact that Article 209(5) was promulgated by way of the famous ‘Legal Framework Order 2002’ of our current President. I am unclear as to this, so if someone has information re: this, it would be appreciated.
(3) It is the SJC that has barred the Chief Justice from taking part in any judicial activity pending the result of the inquiry. The question as to the President ‘firing’ him does not arise in any case since the SJC has effectively ‘suspended’ the Chief Justice.
Therefore, the outcome of this is entirely dependant on the SJC as you might have noted from Article 209(6) of the Constitution. If an outcome is reached whereby in the end the Chief Justice is dismissed, I am sorry but there is no one else to blame but the 5 MOST senior judges that sit on the SJC. If you say, that they are ‘puppets’ of the President, then that says a lot about the judiciary of the country and the man who has been leading them until recently (a.k.a the Chief Justice). If the President goes against the decision of the SJC then he is (potentially) in breach of Article 209(7) of the Constitution.
I dont what Saad K is talking about, but the press reports clearly stated that the dictator fired the Judge. Kind of cute for a country that is saying that it is a democracy. Maybe in the dreams of military.
No country in the world does what the dictator did. Amazing, lets see what the Pakistani intellectuals have to say about this ?
Musharaff does not give a damn about the constitution, I guess he rules the country through his Mullah supported LFO. In any case the whole thing is a joke. It is interesting to note how this dictator wears the uniform when he wants to threaten Pakistanis, but wears a suit to impress the West.
Its clear that he hasn’t been suspended on account of any unlawful activity. Musharraf first negotiated with him for hours; what was the negotiation all about if he has done something wrong. The ultimate crime of Chief Justice was to overturn Steel Mills case and summon the army agencies on human rights violations.
Naeem Bukhari letter was part of plan by Sharif Pirzada (the “architect of dictatorship”).
Pervez Musharaf is ****
(*Admin Comments: SHERYY PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING EXPLETIVES ON THIS BLOG. ONCE AGAIN THE COMMENT POLICY IS TO MAKE INTELLIGENT ARGUMENTS WITHOUT SWEARING OR PERSONALLY ATTACKING ANYONE. I WOULD REQUEST ALL OTHER COMMENTATORS TO FOLLOW THIS*)
Sometimes in order to attain 80% Right….. a 20% Wrong has to be done.
Mr. Musharraf dismissed CJP on the charges of misuse of his authority.
CJP was popular among common man because of his Judicial activism and because he was taking sou moto actions agianst the cases which even were not heard in local courts. He gave verdict aginst the Steel Mill case which was being sold at throw away price. Most recently he oredred to release the disappeared ppl by govenment agencies which were taken away in the name of Al Quaeda agents. So how a man can be beared by government, who was giving independent decisions and which were giving tough time to the dictator. More over there are important cases pending to be decided like President’s uniform and etc. so all this seems that CJP is suspended in very planned and thought after way.
We being public just feel helpless whatever is happening in
this country, which is often called the so called Leader of Islamic world and an Atomic power.
i am distressed
i am distressed
http://micropakistan.org/blog/2007/03/10/what-you-had-to-say/#comment-517
Rohail, come down from the sky and listen to what the people of Pakistan are saying. Your rhetoric on the forum seems to be self styled pro choice agenda which was unfortunatrly thrown out of the window decades back.
[quote]I think the President acted constitutionally under Article 207 [unquote] YOu think ? Based on a finger stuck in the mouth and raised in the air, formula?
[quote] One important thing to be determined is “WHICH OPPOSITION PARTY is behind the scene Using & Manipulating the CJP Iftikhar Choudhry against the present Government”??[unquote] Which government party is paying you to be such a a**kisser?
[quote]The most logical way was as has been done by the President![unquote] Yea? hundreds of legal experts have disagreed. Again, you found logic in a pile of cow dunk which had flattened over time. Look up the word logic in a dictionary
[quote]FAIR ENOUGH !!![unquote] Yes fair enough of you to have limited such a ridiculous writing to as much as you did.