Friday, January 11, 2008
Dr Tariq Hassan
The present superior judiciary of Pakistan is a military-established judiciary handpicked to serve the interest of the establishment generally and to preserve and protect General (r) Pervez Musharraf specifically. The present judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Pakistan have assumed office by taking oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order dated 3 November 2007 promulgated by Genera Pervez Musharraf (as he then was) in his capacity as the Chief of Army Staff. Their appointment is, therefore, in clear violation of the constitution, contrary to all legal norms and practices of the civilized world and void ab initio. Consequently, there is presently no legitimate or credible higher judiciary in the country to provide relief to members of the public.
Notwithstanding the recent revival of the constitution, the judiciary has been grossly desecrated and its integrity and independence greatly undermined by the suspension of the constitution and proclamation of emergency on 3 November 2007 and the Provisional Constitutional Order made there under. The judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Pakistan who did not take oath under the said Provisional Constitutional Order have been unconstitutionally and unlawfully declared to have “ceased to hold office” thus creating an unprecedented judicial vacuum. Continue reading ‘Lawyers’ continued struggle for democracy’
Published on October 1, 2007
in Law.
In the greatest passage of his celebrated play, A Man for All Seasons, Robert Bolt, uses the character of Thomas More, the English lawyer, author and statesman, to argue for the centrality of the law, over and against men, in the governance of all human affairs at a time when his family wants him to have the disloyal Richard Rich arrested:
Wife: Arrest him!
More: For what?
Wife: He’s dangerous!
Roper: For all we know he’s a spy!
Daughter: Father, that man’s bad!
More: There’s no law against that!
Roper: There is, God’s law!
More: Then let God arrest him!
Wife: While you talk he’s gone!
More: And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down (and you’re just the man to do it!), do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
Continue reading ‘Cutting Down the Law by Kamal Jabbar, Chowk.com’
Published on June 22, 2007
in Law.
Ok, though this is a very interesting story I am still not absolutely certain about what I THINK it means. So I am putting it up for the readers to put forward what they think it means before I comment on what it means to me. It is not very simple to interpret the meaning of this work and definitely much more complicated then it initially seems.
Before the Law
Before the law sits a gatekeeper. To this gatekeeper comes a man from the country who asks to gain entry into the law. But the gatekeeper says that he cannot grant him entry at the moment. The man thinks about it and then asks if he will be allowed to come in later on. “It is possible,” says the gatekeeper, “but not now.” At the moment the gate to the law stands open, as always, and the gatekeeper walks to the side, so the man bends over in order to see through the gate into the inside. When the gatekeeper notices that, he laughs and says: “If it tempts you so much, try it in spite of my prohibition. But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other. I can’t endure even one glimpse of the third.” Continue reading ‘Before the Law by Franz Kafka’
Published on June 13, 2007
in Law.
A lot of people in Pakistan have been hailing the legal profession as a winner in the current crisis. However, even though the legal profession is considered one of the most educated and honourable professions, it is in dire straits these days. There is no doubt that it is being led by a group of very capable individuals, but unfortunately they have not been able to improve the condition of the courts or the system and it is headed downhill.
Apparently for many years now, someone who can’t get himself enrolled in a medical, engineering, economics or finance program heads towards law. Why? Because the admission standards are terribly low and some say that once enrolled you only need to go again after three years to collect your degree. I wonder about the standard of lawyers produced through such an educational system.
Continue reading ‘Legal profession: Unhealthy indicators’
By Anum Pasha
Imagine – two hearts devoted to love, two souls struggling to make ends meet in the economically abysmal-rut of this country, and amidst this all, the Pakistani law suddenly deciding their doom in jail. This is a three-year imprisonment in the Central Jail and the District Jail Faislabad. Somewhere in the middle of these four-cornered jails, many questions evoke the minds of the imprisoned – Is death better a calamity than the cage of the law? Is a three-year captivity more of a pain than that felt when one’s spirit abandons the corpse? Is severance from the beloved an affair proficient enough for a three-year-long endurance? The tragedy that befell Shumail Raj and Shahzina Tariq’s lives is one which has been reported on by the dailies and hence, I shall not take up more words to recite the nightmare yet again.
Continue reading ‘The National Pride?’
Imran Khan has called Altaf Hussain a terrorist and has actually said that a legal team is being constituted which would go to London and file a case against the MQM Quaid for killing innocent people. A friend sent me an email putting forward the legal case for Altaf Hussain’s extradition. Its a bit legalese, but I guess it has to be for something which is a purely legal matter. I mean we can’t just walk up to them and say, ‘hand him over’. Most readers might find it a bit too technical, but interesting nevertheless as it deals with specific British and International laws.
Continue reading ‘Can Altaf be extradited?’
Muneer Malik (President Supreme Court Bar Association) defends the legal community by tackling all the arguments put forward by those attacking it. It is brilliantly written and highly convincing. The great thing is that it takes the ‘politicisation’ of the issue head-on and argues that this is not a legal issue, but a purely political one.
Having said that he moves onto say that the reference against the Chief Justice and the illegitimacy of Musharraf’s military regime are interlinked. He implicitly argues that the General must go in order to withhold the constitution and the rule of law. I only wonder if it was so obvious that Musharraf’s regime was illegitimate then why did the CJ take oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) in 2000 and why didn’t the lawyers protest against this before. Why was a movement or struggle for the independence of judiciary not launched when six judges of the Supreme Court, Justice Saeeduz Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajih Uddin, Justice Khalilur Rehman, Justice Mamoon Qazi and Justice Kamal Mansoor refused to break their constitutional oath in order to take another oath under the PCO. Did the lawyers have to wait for this to happen to think about upholding the constitution and the independence of the judiciary?
I ask these questions only so that some of you reading this may be able to offer an explanation. This is in no way doubting the intentions of those concerned, but only expressing certain thoughts that cropped up in my mind while reading this article. Otherwise, I am completely in favour of what the legal community has done in this case and am completely convinced by Mr. Malik’s arguments.
DAWN, May 11 2007
Not motivated by politics
By Muneer A. Malik
Continue reading ‘Lawyer responds: Muneer Malik defends the legal community’
Here you go! We top something. However, its not something to be proud of. In Pakistan there are many different views (religious, cultural, humanistic, etc.) on whether it is right or wrong to execute convicted criminals, but personally I am of the view that it is unnecessary. From years of deterrence studies there is overwhelming evidence that death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a life sentence in prison. Many human rights organizations are trying to get it abolished, however, it might not be that easy. I know where I stand on this, but I am certain that the readers would be divided on this issue.
Continue reading ‘Pakistan tops death row league’
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?
Continue reading ‘…and the jury is out on CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry!’
I still haven’t read it myself, but given the large circulation that it has received I thought it would be best to post it before I added my own comments. I will comment on it in due course once I have had a chance to go over it.
Update: I just read it. Please do read it in its entirety as it is brilliant. My comment follows the post.
Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad
Pakistan
My Lord:
I write this letter as an Officer of the Supreme Court of Pakistan; as an Advocate enrolled in the apex Court since 1984 and in the High Courts since 1972; as an Attorney who has paid more income tax from his earnings in the legal profession than many of my friends, colleagues and seniors elevated to the Bench; and as a stake-holder in the dispensation of justice, intimately and vitally interested in the functioning of the Supreme Court.
Continue reading ‘Advocate Naeem Bokhari’s letter to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan’
