I thought that instead of putting up any further comments on all that has happened it would be a good idea to quote you, the readers, on what you had to say about this incident. We’ve already had several posts about this so the comments are generally scattered. This is an attempt to compile them together. Most of what has come from you has been enlightening, interesting and, at times, funny. Some were offensive and have been removed. Please refrain from posting such comments.
Interesting point Matee raises about Rana Bhagwandas right at the bottom of this post. Why was he not nominated? Why could they not wait for him to return from India? I found it interesting to see on TV that Justice Iqbal was being congratulated by others around him during the oath taking ceremony as he embraced them with a wide smile. Obviously, he has been made the CJ by default and at a time when the nation’s judiciary is in turmoil I find it amusing that he must celebrate his personal good fortune.
Thank you for all your comments.
Tariq calls it:
Kind of cute for a country that is saying that it is a democracy. Maybe in the dreams of military.
He also finds it:
Interesting to note how this dictator wears the uniform when he wants to threaten Pakistanis, but wears a suit to impress the West.
Ahmed reiterates one of the conspiracy theories doing the rounds lately and brings into the fray Mr Sharifuddin Prizada whom he calls the ‘architect of dictatorship’.
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”).
Saad K. made a point about the technically incorrect use of language in the posts by Khuldun and myself. I completely agree with Saad, however, we chose to replace technicality by practicality. Also, this blog is about opinions rather than journalism. We have newspapers for that. In my post I did quote the Dawn report which correctly stated that a reference had been filed against the CJ. However, how many of us truly believe that this reference is not equivalent to a dismissal?
His comment also succinctly puts forward the law and the Presidents position under it.
(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.
(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.
I would like to quote Matee (another reader) in relation to point 3.
In the circumstances, the Constitution did not envisage the appointment of an Acting CJP. It is a matter of propriety that the judge against whom a reference has been submitted to the SJC would abstain themselves from performing their duties (judicial/administrative). (The Constitution does not treat the judges of the superior courts as “civil servants” who could be “suspended”.)
Saad ends by stating:
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.
I myself question this last point. The Judiciary is meant to be independent. Each and every member within it is meant to be independent from each other. Then where does the point about a Chief Justice and the group that he leads arise? He leads a group of independently selected judges who have proven their worth over the years. It is not like he manually goes and selects them. I don’t think he should be held responsible for their activities or their decisions. The blame would fall on them, and them alone, if they make a biased decision in this case. Otherwise, we could easily hold Musharraf responsible for the selection of Justice Chaudhry as CJ in the first place.
A Canadian calls for a united front against the ‘forces of darkness’:
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.
Rohail feels the Presidents actions are justified on the basis that:
Sometimes in order to attain 80% Right….. a 20% Wrong has to be done.
Husain Haqqani also mentions Sharifuddin Pirzada:
The incumbent CJ was appointed because he was Sharifuddin Pirzada’s nominee and because he was known for all the weaknesses which are now being cited as reasons for his ouster. If his obsession with protocol, his pursuit of nominal pecuniary gains and his nepotism did not prevent his nomination to the highest judicial office in Pakistan, why should it have been the reason for his being removed?
The fact is that precisely because of his weaknesses Justice Chaudhry acted like a maverick. He accepted cases the government did not want heard. He gave complex judgments that made life complicated or plain embarrassing for the military-intelligence bureaucracy (such as the one relating to “the disappeared.”)
He also questions Mr Bokhari’s letter:
Incidentally, if General Musharraf is so receptive to letters by thoughtful citizens why did he not act on the letter signed by many retired generals and civil servants that asked him to get out of uniform and let politics take its course?
Afreen shows support for the President by stating the the CJP was given enough opportunity to state his case:
The President practiced his right constitutionally under Article 207 (Correction: 209).
He also met the Chief Justice and inquired from him personally about the allegations against him; before dismissing him. Which I think is proper way to do so.The CJP was given chance to clarify.
Lastly, the Chief Justice will be given chance to present his case also in front of the Supreme Court Committee that has been formed to evaulate the merits.
If found guilty he will be permanently removed; otherwise he’ll be back as the CJP.
Mansoor is skeptical:
Apparently Naeem Bokhari’s letter was part of a stage-managed game. Fooled people for a while…should have known better….he comes across as a pretty good chamcha of present govt. on tv these days.
Shabnam feels even more strongly about it:
It is extremly distressing to read responses to Mr. Bokhari’s letter by those claiming to be from the legal profession. Young lawyers and citizens of Pakistan should not forget that General Musharaf is presently occupying the President’s seat through un-constitutional means and under the same constitution, which he suspended upon coming to power, he committed an act of treason. So its rather amusing to say the least that an un-constitutional head of state removes a chief justice, who represents a constitutional organ of the state. History seems to continuously repeat itself in Pakistan……it feels like de ja vous……
Syed Sibgatullah doubts Mr Bokhari’s intentions with regars to the letter:
Naeem Bokhari has been increasingly coming on TV and has had an ample opportunity to become the devil’s advocate and below whistles around against corrupttion at any and all levels; but he certainly refused to do so and has suddenly come out with this stuff. Obviously, there’s a reason why he didn’t do this previously and raised such voice against others.
Following his TV debates, one can easily come to the conclusion that he’s been just another junta mouthpiece. This impression solidified in my mind when recently, I watched him interviewing the President - General and his PM back to back in his show on HUM TV. More than being an interviewer, he acted like a poodle dog, to speak frankly. He was so servile and confirmist to both of them that watching the show became a sick and nauseating exercise. However, in a previous episode, when he interviewed Benazir Bhutto, he acted like he was a state prosecutor. In that instance, he became so agonizing that Benazir left her seat and he called for a break. Yes, it was all aired, although the program was recorded.
This is Naeem Bokhari - subjective to the core, even when interviewing popular personalities on TV.
I was a bit confused by Naveed’s comments, though I believe he feels that the SJC decision would go in CJ’s favour. He equates it to a game of chess:
People who have been playing chess can well understand what is going on. In this game you creat a certain situation, forcing the oponent to make that move. I foresee the 13th March decision of SJC as an unexpected, astonishing and at the same time pleasing. We all know who (group of people)actually wrote the letter, so called written and is famous by Naeem Bokhari.
Come on lets play chess…..
Muhammad questions the timing for Mr Bokhari’s letter. He feels there were many other judges who were not known for their honesty then why now?
I am suprised why this is the first time Naeem Bokhari has sent an open letter to a corrupt C.J.P. In Pakistan’s chequered history of corrupt leaders and judges, this is the first time he has sent such a letter and that too, so openly.
Has this letter been drafted originally by Naeem Bokhari or perturbed rich Senior Lawyers, mentioned in the open letter, who wanted to fire the shot on the CJP, over the shoulder of Naeem Bokhari.
I find Ahmed’s comment funny as his nick for the President is Busharraf and ends the comment by calling him a ‘bakri’:
Has any person wrote an open letter to Busharaf regarding How his sun studied un US of A ? All the military is actually a state agent and Qabza group.
When I was studying in Lahore there was a slogan BAKRI but I never understood its meaning. I am thankful to Busharaf who made it clear that what Bakri means. Actually he is a picture of the word BAKRI.
Sheraz Akhtar follows the general trend and states:
This letter clearly shows that this drafted with the help and wish of the GOVERNMENT, so they can make a base and issue to kick Chief Justice out. There gonna be Election soon and Cief justice was gonna play key role in making sure that election would be free and fair.
Its a big shame to PAKISTAN and SPOILER OF COUNTRY ( PERVEZ MUSHARAF)
Syed feels the now Mr Bokhari should be made the CJ since the seat is vacant.
well done naeem ,I think you deserve an appreciation to pay a way for appointment of lt.general/maj.general for the the vacavt seat of cfief justice of supreme court.
Matee feels the President should have dealt with the CJ with more respect. He also feels it is discriminatory to take action against one judge and leave the rest. He makes some interesting points:
I have generally sided with the President’s policies since the time he took over. Nevertheless, I must make two comments here with regard to government’s action yesterday:
1. Calling the CJP to the President’s (or even worse Army Chief’s) place to ’satisfy’ the President/PM with regard to the allegations would hurt the institution, and independence, of judiciary in the long run. No matter what justification the government may have with regard to this action, Article 209 (the only pertinent Constitutional provision with regard to the misconduct of a superior court judge) did not entitle the President to take such action. Furthermore, what message has been conveyed to the SJC who is going to decide on the matter on the 13th instant? “The President/ PM were not satisfied with the CJP’s response to the allegations however, the SJC may look into this matter and decide accordingly”!
2. In the circumstances, the Constitution did not envisage the appointment of an Acting CJP. It is a matter of propriety that the judge against whom a reference has been submitted to the SJC would abstain themselves from performing their duties (judicial/administrative). (The Constitution does not treat the judges of the superior courts as “civil servants” who could be “suspended”.)
Furthermore, and without prejudice to the foregoing comments, what was the hurry? Why could the government not wait until the return of the next senior most judge, Rana Bhagwandas who I understand is on a short trip to India?
May he live in interesting times – a Chinese curse! “Like it or not, we live in interesting times” - Robert F. Kennedy.
Simple Power Play, A message to institutions of the country that Who is Daddy?
CJP was trying to tell daddy that he is also a Kinda daddy but dady showed him actually that no matter how much weaker a daddy remanis Daddy.
Long Live Busharaf and Generals’ Pakistan.
بستی والوں کے ليے وہ اک بلا ہو جاۓ گا
سانپ کو مہلت ملی تو اڎدہا ہو جاۓ گا
روشنی پہيلانے والے کو سزا دی جاۓ گی
جب اندھیرا شھر کا فرماںروا ہو جاۓ گا
آدمی کو آدمی رہنے دو بہتر ہے یہی
جس کی تم پو جا کرو گےوہ خدا ہو جاۓ گا
جڑ پکڑ جایيں گی اسلم سازشيں اس کے خلاف
پيڑ جب اندر سے اک دن کھوکھلا ہو جاۓگا
AHMED
Hilarious!!! Love the Daddy comment!
Justice Bhagwas Das is on leave untill 23 rd March and on a personal visit to India. The next senior most Judge is Justice Javed Iqbal. As SC is an institution ans CJP is an administrative post so it can not kept vacant untill another judge returns back, the senior most available judge would be acting CJ.
i dont really now , whome should we look towards now to kick mush and his bastard team out of country ?
May Allah protect us from their evil.
Nadeem: I doubt the fact that Justice Das was out of the country had anything to do with the appointment of Justice Javed Iqbal. As has been pointed out in the media from New Delhi to Lahore it takes 25 mins. Also I doubt our Mr. President woke up that morning (if it was in fact the morning) and suddenly decided to kick the CJ out of his own office and so Justice Iqbal ‘had’ to be posted as you said.
Hakim:
(1) I accept that ‘practicality’ would suggest that the CJ has been suspended or even kicked out. Even though journalistic responsibility would dictate a more balanced view, the same clarification with respect to the actual action was not provided by the media and therefore I thought it appropriate to be ‘technical’.
Although, you (and I) will both have to backtrack if by some MIRACLE the SJC decided that there was no wrongful misconduct since the Chief Justice would have to be made ‘functional’ again. Now, that would be interesting!
(2) The Chief Justice is responsible for the proper functioning of the entire judicial system, not least the Supreme Court. This is irrespective of how the other judges were selected [just like the PM is responsible for the action of his ministers even though they themselves are elected by the people (umm..in a proper democracy)]. If he was leading a group of justices that are puppets (entirely speculative) for two years and- he failed to recognise that this was the case- then he didn’t deserve to be the CJ- or he did recognise that such was the case and did not take any actions (ironically, under Art. 209!)- then shame on him.
if only u people knew the truth.the truth is our prime minister holds dual nationality so he cant become prime minister.he was to appear in court for this.And the musharaf tenure as holding both offices of military chief and president was to expire and the CJP was expected to ask him to step down from his one office.one of the judges expected to be at his tribunal is ifthikar hussain chaudhry, the high court judge of lahore.his son is my good friend and he told this is musharraf attempt to save himself and nothing else.everybody love power init?
Why are we Pakistanis referencing the constitution anyway? when we all know that we live in a military dictatorship and not a civilian democracy! …things can get alot simpler that way!
I think the present establishment should stop this drama of fake trial infront of SJC as we already know the result. This white marble building standing next to parliament building in Pakistan is supposed to be GOD’S face on earth protecting and ensuring justice is implented and carried out.
Therefore as this just stands the white marble building the establishment might as well totally abolish the supreme court of Pakistan and might as well bring the military courts and make the retired or active generals or lieutenant generals judges as well to decide the fate of this country and people of this country.
Because it looks like the whole nation is asleep and there is nothing that seems to wake them up. Unless some drastic situation develops there is nothing that seems to be happening.
There is no such thing the word ‘ instition that exsists in the democratic govts and military establishments dictionary’s in Pakistan they are just few stories building standing there in Pakistan for some journalists to take photos and public to tour around Islamabad.
Just saw Naeem Bukhari on one of the TV channels presenting his case of the accusations he made on the Chief Justice.
I read his open letter did find it full of accusations but none of them require him to kicked liked this from General President Musharraf saab.
Theres also talks among other things about him asking for the list of missing persons in Pakistan who are allegedly taken prisoners or sent to other countries like USA illegally to win their support for current government without a fair trial and chance to clarify here.
One of the readers mentioned our beloved Prime Minister Mr. Shortcut Aziz
Well hes a banker on vacation acting as a president…
Won seats somewhere in Thar to become part of the establishment.
Anyway.. everything seems such a fake here… what else can I say.. have not much of a faith in the democratic parties who had their chances to form governments.
Nothing at all but a sham!
I saw Naeem Bukhari’s interview on HUM TV. It was very frank, truthful and factual.
@ The cards were very well played by the Opposition parties. They manipulated the CJP to provoke the Government.
@ They knew after few months of provoking the Government would re-act; and then Opposition parties will politicize the matter.
@ It is not the Right of the Judiciary to meddle in Political decisions made by Government. Judiciary should be free from politics!
@ If the CJP was a self-respected person with ego; why did he go to meet the President? He should have refused if he thought himself right!
@ Why didn’t the CJP resign in protest of the Military Government when he became the CJP alongwith his 80 colleagues (who are now dis-rupting peace in country)?
@ Why do these CJP take oath from military people?
@ How does the CJP and his family own BMW’s and Mercedes Benz?
@ Why the CJP was handpicking Cases political specifically designed on-purpose just to provoke, annoy, be-little and irk the Government?
@ These oppositon parties with crocodile tears; have themselves dismissed and degraded Supreme Courts in their tenures.
I fully support President Musharraf !!! Knowing that the media is also being paid by political parties!
An impression is being given as if its only the lawyers who are protesting the abominable removal of the honourable chief justice.
The fact is every single Pakistani and general public member feels deeply disturbed by the manner in which our dictator president has brought our beloved country to this sad juncture. Keeping the CJ under practical house-arrest, mishandling him and then pressurising the media is all very unfortunate. Whichever way the verdict goes one thing is for sure, it is a lose-lose situation I wonder if the power-crazed general President pondered for a moment and realised the serious consequences.
Short of leading us to the brink of a civil war, somebody rightly said it heralds the “beginning of the end of the Musharraf-era”. I have great faith in God that Inshallah truth will prevail and that will be the case.
Sacking of the chief judge
Plain words
By M.B. Naqvi
The country’s president called the country’s chief justice to his camp office in Rawalpindi for an explanation and the latter returned under escort and was confined to his residence incommunicado. What went on between the two is not known. The president will make a reference to the Supreme Judicial Council and to investigate the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s (CJP) misconduct. In what did this misconduct lay has not been divulged, though planted stories tell the tale.
The president does not like disorderly or disobedient persons; he has not made the formal inaugural speech of a new Parliament for three years running because he finds the deputies of the parliament disorderly. They shout, hoot, and refuse to listen to the august person in silence. On the other side was Iftikhar Chaudhry whose record is one of judicial activism. He did tread on many sensitive toes. He was given to taking suo motto notice of various happenings. Some of his judgements embarrassed the government. He was the person who ensured Mukhtaran Mai’s case was taken up, heard and in some way decided. Later she was enabled to travel abroad against the wishes of General Musharraf who said she would defame Pakistan abroad and sully the country’s image.
The suspended CJP had caused serious embarrassment to the government. He frustrated the sale of Pakistan Steel Mills, the largest industrial undertaking. He found this privatisation to be non-transparent and public exchequer stood to suffer the loss of many billions of rupees. He demanded information of the hundreds of missing Pakistani citizens.
It is believed by many that most of these people have been picked up by intelligence agencies. Since then their families have been running from pillar to post to find out about their whereabouts. The CJP upbraided the government several times regarding the missing people. In one case, he even fined an federal secretary to the government. On the downside, it is said he loved protocol, was abrasive, rude to lawyers, liked to show off his power; and he had tried to get his policeman son a better posting.
The legal fraternity is of course in a state of shock. This is a direct assault on what remains of independence of the judiciary. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry thought nothing of embarrassing the government too many times for the sake of providing relief to unimportant people. He has been punished before the SJC even tried to examine the presidential reference filed against him. This is a disgrace to all citizens, not only to the members of the legal fraternity. Most other dictators round the world have not done anything so blatant as sacking and arresting a chief justice.
Naeem Bokhari, a lawyer from Lahore and a TV personality, wrote an open letter detailing various misdeeds of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Although he later denied having written this letter, the letter did go round the world under his name and is said to contain much of the charge sheet the government has sent to the SJC. That the chief justice was not toeing the government line and was careless about saying and giving judgements that the government did not like is the real reason why he was sacked. But why now and why not a fortnight earlier or a month later. There is a telltale quasi-explanation.
A particular writ has been filed with the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional vires of what the government is openly planning to do: the latter wants the president to be re-elected by the existing assemblies a second time just before they are to complete their tenure. The petition also mentions that the government is likely to postpone the election due this year. That too is undesirable. Also included in the impugned government intentions is that the president wishes to continue to remain as the chief of the army staff indefinitely after being re-elected. How would the CJP have reacted to this petition? What would have been his judgement? This is a matter of great political importance for Musharraf and the system from he has devised. Could it be that Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was not likely to take a line that would have satisfied the president’s desire?
This of course is not the first assault on the independence of higher judiciary. This has happened many times before. Everyone knows of major constitutional cases in Pakistan’s top court. It began with Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad in 1953-54. In the latter year he sacked a sovereign Constituent Assembly on a charge of failing to perform its primary duty of writing a constitution for seven years although the man who did this was himself a creature of that assembly. Sovereignty over Pakistan had been transferred to this assembly as the representative of the Pakistani people.
Ayub Khan tore up the first constitution, hurriedly written on the non-democratic principle of parity between the two unequal wings, barely two and a half years after it came into force. Then the former military chief and the self-appointed field marshal wrote a constitution for his own needs. Some people went to the top court and complained. The then chief judge, Justice Muhammad Muneer, gave a judgement that still resounds in the great halls of justice as the most disgraceful judgement ever delivered in Pakistan. A legal fiction was invented: state necessity required extra constitutional measures in extraordinary situation. It has served all dictators.
This principle has provided a fig leaf behind which naked aggressions have been committed against the people of Pakistan by successive military chiefs. CJPs had been either cowardly or in cahoots with dictators. The top courts, to their shame, always upheld a military coup d’etat. Justice Chaudhry was the first CJP to refuse to toe the government line, although earlier some individual judges have also said ‘no’ to arbitrary oaths. Some legal experts disgraced themselves by justifying extra-constitutional actions of freebooters.
Now what view should the common citizens take is a question that faces all thinking types. They cannot support such action but there are very few means available to them to oppose it. The government of the day is not greatly bothered about the opinion of those who are not with it. Unfortunately, ordinary citizen cannot do much because there are no strong political parties that would mobilise them and channelise the people’s voice to some effect.
The writer is a veteran journalist and freelance columnist. Email: mbnaqvi at cyber.net.pk