The Supreme Court has been transcending its legal boundaries and constitutional role. Its decisions are biased, unfair and politicized. The Court is not a neutral and objective defender of law and judges have been acting as puppets.

The Judiciary is not independent and appears to be playing someone’s game. Indeed the Supreme Court is acting as a proxy for imposing a controlled democracy in Pakistan. It seems that characters such as Imran Khan and Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan are part of this game. The former ISI chief Lt. General Shuja Pasha was an architect of the latest effort to introduce ‘clean democracy’ in Pakistan. General Pasha was not alone in military’s one more political adventure.

Actually, the military considers itself the sole defender of Pakistan and generals have been trying to shape and control the Pakistani politics. In fact, the military never felt comfortable with parliamentary form of democracy. For this reason every few years new campaigns are launched to ‘clean’ the system.

Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan’s recent calls for the establishment of a technocrat government and Imran Khan’s Tsunami are reflections of military’s new efforts to bring a setup that ‘suits’ Pakistan. The Judiciary and media are means to complete that agenda. As the Parliament is about to complete its term, Imran Khan is threatening that he would not accept results of the new elections. Dr. Qadeer, dubbed by some as the future president,  has joined hands with Imran Khan. The media and the Judiciary are taking cue from some in the military to pressurize the present government.  All these actors want to maintain the status quo by imposing a controlled democracy.

The military’s frustration with the current political system is understandable. The System is inefficient and has failed to solve key problems. It is also true, to some extent, that Westminster style democracy is not suitable for Pakistan because it is not an indigenous governing system and doesn’t represent the true soul of the Pakistani society. Therefore it is a fact that the Pakistani political system is in need of major reforms. The country has to develop a democratic model that meets local needs and reflects aspirations of the people of Pakistan. However, this goal can only be achieved through democracy, not by military rules or military controlled system.

Historically, the military has damaged Pakistan more than any other institution. General Ayub Khan turned Pakistan into a U.S satellite state. He had sown seeds of hatred in East Pakistan and General Yahya Khan’s military operation broke Pakistan; General Zia’s evil policies and his Afghan Jihad divided and destroyed all fibers of our society. General Aslam Beg’s intervention in Kashmir and Afghanistan, and General Musharraf’s participation in the ‘war on terror’ all the above actions and policies have devastated Pakistan.

There is a perception in Pakistan, some have been promoting it intentionally, that only a few generals are responsible for crimes against the people and constitution of Pakistan. It is a false argument; the military as an institution and organization violated the Constitution. Also the Judiciary as an institution collaborated with the military to harm and hurt Pakistan.  Islamic parties and the media always supported the military and the Judiciary.

The military interventions have been disastrous for Pakistan because  military dictators promoted extremist, racist and narrow-minded agendas. From the very beginning, with the help of its proxies, the military manufactured an ‘Ideology of Pakistan’ and an inflated and superficial nationalism blended with distorted Islamic history. During the Zia’s era the military had portrayed itself as the Holy Army of Islam.

Up until today some military officers, judges and mullahs as well as the media argue that Pakistan is a security state, which is at perpetual war with its neighbors and most of the world. They insist that Pakistan was created with a purpose to lead the so-called Muslim Ummah and it will eventually dominate the entire world.  People with such thinking often follow double standards. A Supreme Court judge, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa is one of them.

Justice Khosa likes to attack those who disagree with deeply flawed security perceptions of the military and judiciary, their misplaced self-righteousness and false moral and cultural values, but Justice Khosa doesn’t have the moral courage and grace to say that his own father-in-law and a retired Supreme Court judge Naseem Hasan Shah was professionally dishonest and had committed a judicial murder. Shouldn’t Justice Shah be tried by Justice Khosa’s court?

People with Justice Khosa mindset consider the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) unfit to govern the country despite that fact that it is the single largest party that enjoys support in all parts of Pakistan.

Once again, financially and morally corrupt generals, judges and journalists have launched a concerted attempt to disrupt the smooth transition of power and continuity of democratic process. The PPP-led coalition government has been under attack because some perceive the PPP a threat to their security agenda.

The military eliminated the founder leader of PPP, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, because independent minded Bhutto was a Pakistani nationalist with a modern world-view. Besides, visionary Bhutto had become a threat to imperialist interests in a region where the Pakistani military was a tool of Western imperialist powers. To appease the domestic audience the military used the name of Islam to remove and assassinate Bhutto but in reality generals were protecting Western (American interests) in the region.

The mindset that had eliminated Bhutto is active again to drive the PPP out of power before it completes its term. The Judiciary, the media and some politicians have been inventing scandals. Spy agencies have been involved in dirty campaigns. For example, SMS services on mobile phones are used to defame and unnerve President Asif Ali Zardari.

In Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, the establishment has found an ambitious and egoist judge who likes limelight. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was a member of the Supreme Court Bench that had provided legal cover to General Pervez Musharraf’s military coup. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry also took a new oath under a PCO and is therefore a PCO judge.

Justice Chaudhry is managing the Judiciary as a political party with the help of media cheerleaders. As a proxy of the establishment, the Judiciary is haunting the Parliament and a large number of media black sheep are justifying and glorifying inappropriate actions of judges. Perhaps some generals, judges and journalists are  preparing the stage for a ‘new dawn’ in Pakistan.

Shiraz Paracha is a journalist and analyst. He can be reached at: shiraz_paracha@hotmail.com

نواز نے 500ملین پائونڈ برطانیہ کیسے منتقل کیے؟

ٹیکس بچانے اور اپنے کاروبار اور کمپنیوں کو سرکاری وسائل سے بے تحاشا وسعت دینے کے لیے میدان سیاست میں کودنے والے نوا زشریف اور عدلیہ مبینہ طور پر سوئس بینک میں موجود صدر آصف علی زرداری کے منی لانڈرنگ کے 6 کروڑ ڈالر پاکستان واپس لانے کے لیے بہت سرگرم ہیں لیکن نواز شریف کے 32 ملین ڈالر کے منی لانڈرنگ کے کیس میں عدلیہ سٹے دے کر چین کی نیند سو رہی ہے۔ نواز شریف کی منی لانڈرنگ کی یہ رقم لندن کے کسی بینک میں موجود ہے جس کے تمام ثبوت کیس کی فائل میں لگے ہوئے ہیں۔ اس کے علاوہ برطانیہ میں پراپرٹی اور رہائشی سکیموں کا سب سے بڑا کاروبار نواز شریف کے فرزند حسن نواز کررہے ہیں جنہوں نے بقول مبشر لقمان برطانیہ کے ٹیکس ڈیپارٹمنٹ کے سامنے 500 ملین پائونڈ کے اپنے کاروباری اثاثے ظاہر کیے ہیں۔

یہ بیسیوں ارب روپے بھی پاکستان سے برطانیہ پہنچے ہیں اور یقیناً غیر قانونی طریقے سے ہی برطانیہ منتقل کیے گئے ہیں کیونکہ اتنی بڑی رقم ملک سے باہر منتقل کرنے کے لیے اس پر ٹیکس ادا کرنا لازمی تھا۔ اس طرح یہ منی لانڈرنگ کا کیس پاکستان کی تاریخ کا سب سے بڑا کیس بن سکتا ہے اس طرح آصف علی زرداری کے 6 کروڑ ڈالر اونٹ کے منہ میں زیرے کے مترادف ہیں۔ نواز شریف کو حکومت پر یہ برتری حاصل ہے کہ ان کے پاس میڈیا کوآرڈینیٹرز کی ایک بہترین ٹیم موجود ہے اور وہ میڈیا کے اپنے حامی سیکشن سے بہترین تعلقات استوار رکھتے ہیں جس کے باعث نواز شریف کی جانب سے وفاقی حکومت پر الزامات لگانے کی گھن گرج اتنی بڑھ جاتی ہے کہ وفاقی حکومت کے وزیروں کی وضاحتیں اور جوابی الزماات اس شور میں دب کر رہ جاتے ہیں۔ میرے ایک دوست صحافی جو پیپلز پارٹی کے حامی ہیں جب انہیں پیپلز پارٹی کی کمزوریوں پر غصہ آتا ہے تو وہ برملا کہہ اٹھتے ہیں کہ پیپلز پارٹی کو نااہلیت کی بیماری ہے۔ بہرحال نواز شریف نے پاکستان میں سیاست کسی نہ کسی ادرے کے سہارے کی ہے۔ پہلے ان کا سہارا فوج ہوا کرتی تھی اور اب کوئی اور۔پورے ملک کی وکلائ تنظیموں نے یک زبان ہو کر یہ کہا ہے کہ وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی اس وقت تک ملک کے آئینی و قانونی وزیراعظم رہیں گے جب تک ان کے خلاف سپریم کورٹ کا تفصیلی فیصلہ نہیں آجاتا اور اس کے بعد ان کی نظر ثانی کی اپیل کا بھی فیصلہ نہیں کردیا جاتا لیکن نواز شریف ملک بھر کی قانونی برادری کی یہ بات ماننے کے لیے تیار نہیں۔

سابق صدر مشرف کے دور میں ایک عدالت نے طیارہ ہائی جیکنگ کیس میں نواز شریف کو 25 سال قید کی سزا سنائی تھی۔ یہ سزا عدالت نے ایک اخلاقی جرم میں دی تھی۔ نواز شریف کو سعودی عرب بھیجتے وقت سابق صدر مشرف نے اپنے صدارتی اختیارات استعمال کرتے ہوئے نواز شریف کی یہ سزا معاف کر دی تھی لیکن اتنی بھاری سزا کے باعث نواز شریف الیکشن لڑنے کے نااہل ہوگئے۔ نواز شریف نے واپس آکر سپریم کورٹ میں اس سزا کے خلاف اپیل دائر کی جسے 9 سال کے بعد ایک نئی مثال قائم کرتے ہوئے سپریم کورٹ نے سنا اور کہا کہ وہ ایکشن لڑ سکتے ہیں کیونکہ صدارتی معافی کے ساتھ ہی ان کی نااہلیت بھی ختم ہوگئی ہے تاہم یہ اپیل ابھی تک زیر التوائ ہے اور نواز شریف الیکشن لڑنے کے لیے آزاد ہیں جب کہ وہ تیس سیکنڈ کی سزا پانے والے وزیراعظم کو نااہل قرار دے رہے ہیں۔ نواز شریف جوپنجاب حکومت کے ذریعے ملک کی 66 فیصد آبادی پر حکومت بھی کررہے ہیں اور اپوزیشن کے مزے بھی لے رہے ہیں اسے کہتے ہیں ایک ٹکٹ میں دو مزے۔

ان دونوں مزوں میں سے نواز شریف ایک مزا بھی گنوانا نہیں چاہتے۔ اس لیے انہیں وہ لوگ بہت برے لگتے ہیں جو انہیں اسمبلیوں سے مستعفی ہونے کا مشورہ دیتے ہیں البتہ وہ وزیراعظم سے استعفیٰ مانگنے کے بارے میں بہت سنجیدہ ہیں۔ وہ اپنے بیانات کے ذریعے مرنے یا مارنے کی حد تک پہنچ چکے ہیں دراصل انہوں نے دوبارہ 1990ئ کی دہائی کی سیاست شروع کر دی لیکن فرق یہ ہے کہ ان کی پہلی محاذ آرائی ایک اعلیٰ تعلیم یافتہ نرم خو خاتون محترمہ بے نظیر بھٹو سے رہی لیکن اس مرتبہ ان کے مدمقابل صدر آصف علی زرداری جیسے شاطر سیاست دان ہیں جن کی سیاسی چالیں کھیلنے کی مہارت کو پورے ملک کے سیاستدانوں نے تسلیم کرلیا ہے۔ یہ امر بھی اپنی جگہ حقیقت ہے کہ نواز شریف سات یا آٹھ ماہ آسانی سے عام انتخابات کا انتظار کرسکتے تھے لیکن انہوں نے اپنی انتخابی مہم کا آغاز احتجاجی تحریک سے شروع کر دیا ہے۔ مقصد یہ ہے کہ ٴٴفرینڈلی اپوزیشنٴٴ کے الزام کے داغ کو اپنے دامن سے ہٹانا چاہتے ہیں۔

وہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ محاذ آرائی سے اپنے ووٹ بینک میں اضافہ کرسکیں گے لیکن اس کے نقصانات ان کی عقل سے بالا تر ہیں۔ شدید محاذ آرائی کی صورت میں ان کے خلاف چھوٹے صوبوں میں ان کے خلاف نفرت میں اضافہ ہوگا کیونکہ انہیں چھوٹے صوبوں میں صرف پنجاب کا لیڈر سمجھا جاتا ہے۔ محاذ آرائی کی صورت ان پر ماضی میں لگنے والے الزامات تازہ ہوکر سامنے آجائیں گے۔ سپریم کورٹ کے نام پر سیاسی جنگ لڑنے کے باعث نواز شریف اس ادارے کو فائدہ نہیں بلکہ نقصان پہنچائیں گے اور ایسے انصاف فراہم کرنے والے ادارے کو پاکستان کی گندی سیاست میں گھسیٹ کر وہ اس ادارے کی حیثیت کو بھی عوام کی نظروں میں مشکوک بنا دیں گے۔ اگر ان کی محاذ آرائی کے نتیجہ میں کوئی غیر آئینی سیٹ اپ برسر اقتدار آگیا تو پھر انہیں دس سال کے انتظار کا عذاب جھیلنا پڑے گا اور ملک میں آزاد عدلیہ کا تصور بھی معدوم ہو جائے گا۔ ایک بات اپنی جگہ حقیقت ہے کہ پیپلز پارٹی کی حکومت ان کے شور شرابے سے مرعوب ہو کر حکومت چھوڑنے والی نہیں۔ وہ صرف شہید ہو کر ہی اقتدار سے رخصت ہونا پسند کرے گی اور ایک مرتبہ پھر شہادت کا ووٹ حاصل کرنے کی تیاری کرے گی۔ شہادتیں پیپلز پارٹی کے مقدر میں لکھی ہوئی ہیں اور ہر شہادت اسے پہلے سے زیادہ قوت بخشتی رہی ہے۔

Source: Daily Mashriq Lahore

After days of much speculation, the volcano of PM’s contempt case  for not implementing the SC’s ruling in the NRO case,  that was frantically and deafeningly been erupting for days, finally erupted and is being expected to damage, if not burn everything down. Yeah yeah!  We all heard that! Ever since the much-awaited, and for many the much-expected, “historical verdict” was out, we have all been talking about it in offices, cafes, social networking sites,  etc,. Our discussions and arguments revolve around from demanding the PM to resign, (since he is found guilty and convicted now), to threats of another violent street protest in the forms of Long March or Tsunami.

But before I go on even thinking about the slightest possibility of any such protest, I would actually take out a moment to review what has happened and the way a mango man sees it, who for the last couple of weeks continues to wonder Why just one Letter has become the pain of all getting country to a standstill ?

A night before the verdict was out, we see most of our current affairs anchors, politicians, retired army officers and closet legal geniuses discussing the drop-scene of the Contempt case and aftermath of PM’s political future, to the extent of even reporting “the preparations in Adyala jail” and “the expected publication of Chaah-e-Yousuf Volume II”.

The following morning, way before 9 am, we see reporters reporting from SC about the security measures, walk-through gates, hovering helicopters and excited crowd of public, PPP ministers waiting to greet the Prime Minister and show their support with him. The PM marches towards the courtroom, amid rose petals and cheering slogans.

Here comes the interesting part , inside the fully occupied courtroom, as predicted by the media pundits,  7 judges unanimously announce  the  Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani for contempt of court and orders imprisonment for 37 seconds till the rising of the judges. Yes,  37 seconds, never before than this conviction, many people knew any punishment could be as short as that. It took almost everyone with surprise. First, I thought the media is as usual trying to present the news in the most dramatic, sensationalized and entertaining way with their most annoying manner of mixing news with special effects, background song and not-so-funny one liners.  But I could bring myself to believe all that when I found the same news on several other news channels too.

The Prime Minister gets convicted since he “willfully” disobeyed the court’s orders by not writing a letter to the Swiss authorities to re-open the money laundering cases against President Asif Ali Zardari.  And according to the judges, PM’s actions have “tended to scandalize, defame and ridicule the court”. Yes the same PM, who stood respectfully before the bench and humbly appeared before the court thrice, but those who think actions speak louder than words, Forget it, old Chinese proverbs require upgrades.

In a country like Pakistan where democracy is taking its roots, the list of “First time in the history of Pakistan” seems to be never-ending. The longest serving Prime Minister, whose the First one to complete 4 years of his tenure, becomes the first serving PM to get convicted who completes his imprisonment in the courtroom (thankfully without being bullied by cops, handcuffed or going behind bars) and walks out of the courtroom, waving his supporters and taking his way back home, I meant literally as PM’s house is adjacent to SC.

Formerly I used to wonder if ever in world’s history, any country’s Supreme Court got over-involved and stuck up with “You must write a letter” sort of urgings. Subsequently, I wonder along the course of the frenzy in public discourse, the real matter has been lost. The real issue was “non-writing of the letter” which leads to contempt of court convicted by a PM, who has constitutional immunity just like the President, Governor, CM or any other political head, during his term in the office. What’s left to debate now, absolutely nothing!!!

The Supreme Court’s order for convicting the PM did not achieve its desired objective – the letter has not been written yet.  So order lacked effectiveness. Secondly it did not earn the judges any respect. When a Suo Moto is taken, “a fair trial” is not an alien demand by the respondent. Judges not paying any attention towards the impartiality of the bench and then a unanimous decision by all 7 judges does give an impression of biased and ready-made justice. In a displeased national atmosphere, when the ruling party has been made to face numerous court cases, and has grievances against the discriminately-independent judiciary, PPP expecting the judges to treat them fairly is just like expecting the bull not to attack you because you are a vegetarian.

Thirdly, since it’s the same Supreme Court that miscarriaged the justice and hung ZAB in 1979 and it’s the same Supreme Court that legalized the military regimes of all four dictators, the credibility of the highest court of law was at stake. By convicting the PM and restricting the punishment to 37 secs, and not disqualifying him, the SC held back the decision and left it mischievously open. . . keep guessing!!!

I certainly find the serving PM fortunate enough, in comparison to the other PMs’ who were sentenced for hijacking a plane or hanged.

And to say the least,

Huun laiq-e-tazeer par ilzaam hay jhoota

Mujrim tau huun baishak go khata aur hee kuchh hai !!

While out to the Mango man, this time its evident that its always about portraying the ruling party as unpopular, leadership as corrupt and crooked, keeping the government occupied in defending some allegedly conspiracy against the military establishment, and derailing democracy, whenever, however and in whatever way possible.

Now this decision of Supreme Court can be considered the best opportunity to achieve any of the following objectives:

1)    Remove the PM, whose so going to evolve a consensus for the creation of a new Seraiki province.

2)     Perfect time to start campaigning for the upcoming general election, and get brownie points by removing/replacing the convicted PM

But some things are easy said than done. Let’s just assume both the options one after the other. If the PM is replaced by some other ruling party , he is still not going to write the letter. For PPP leaders, it’s more about their loyalties with their leaders. Hence, it’s of no use.

Second option is the constitutional way to remove the Pm is to get a vote of no-confidence, which is impossible. I must hand it to PPP for taking its coalition partners together in all highs and lows. Despite opposition, media and judiciary being on one side, they just can’t over-throw the ruling party.

Now the unconstitutional way is “The Street Protest”- not a new idea anymore, it has been tested and tried once which achieved its set goal. So to pressurize the government to remove the PM and call for an early election, we see PML-N threatening to go for a Long March and PTI gearing up for a Tsunami. Unfortunately, and nothing like the restoration of the judiciary movement, this street protest is never going to take place. I can go on with an endless list how many times we all have heard NS threatening to use the Long March tool in the past four years. And PML-N can’t be that stupid to resign from their positions, get along with PTI, protest and then get forever done with their remaining vote bank. Sorry Miyan Sahab! You lack that charisma and charm that youth these days see in Khan Sahab!!  Even if they both demonstrate together, Khan Sahab is certainly going to take away the whole cake and leave the Sharif brothers with a heavy heart. And it would be very heart-breaking for all of us too see you hatching conspiracies in Raiwind for the next five years and bearing Ch Nisar’s long boring useless speeches.

But amid all this war of words, chaos and confusion, we must not forget that due to the court proceedings and political instability, our economy is suffering and collapsing day by day. The US-Pak relationships need to be mended on apriority basis. The sooner everything is fixed, the better!!!

Interior Minister Rehman Malik proved that PML-N Chief Nawaz Sharif was involved in money laundering.
He gave evidence against Nawaz Sharif would be placed before the Supreme Court and National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for alleged corruption of $32 million.
Federal Rehman Malik said a commission may be formed to investigate alleged involvement of Nawaz Sharif in money laundering.
He appealed to the Supreme Court to call him and he would present all evidence. He further alleged that Nawaz Sharif made an NRO with former President Farooq Ahmed Leghari and as a result, Benazir Bhutto’s elected government was unconstitutionally dismissed in November 1996.
Federal Rehman Malik said that Nawaz Sharif made a second NRO with dictator Pervez Musharraf and went abroad after signing an agreement and violated the Charter of Democracy (COD) he signed with Benazir Bhutto in 2006.

تاریغ کے فیصلے میں عوام کے عظیم نمائندہ پر ہو نے والی گل یاشی کا بھی تزکرہ ہوگا۔

کسی بھی زینے پہ لرزے نہیں تمہارے قدم

مقام جبرمیں صبر و رضا مبارک ہو

تمہارے جرم ہے آئین سے وفاداری

یہ جرم اگر ہے تو اس کی سزا مبارک ہو

نزیر قیصر—-روزنامہ مشرق لاہور

تین سو ننانوے قبل از مسیح میں سقراط پر یہ فرد جرم عائد کی گئی کہ وہ نوجوانوں کا اخلاق بگاڑتا رہا ہے اور شہر کے دیوتائوں کی بجائے خود ساختہ خدائوں پر ایمان رکھتا ہے۔ یہ الزامات شاید آج کے زمانہ کے آزاد خیالی، انسانی حقوق کی پاسداری، تبدیلی کی بات کرتے ہوئے مقتدرہ قوتوں کی اتھارٹی کو چیلنج کرنے اور آئین کی بالادستی جیسے تصورات سے مشابہت رکھتے ہوں گے۔ سقراط کے خلاف استغاثے نے مطالبہ کیا کہ اسے موت کی سزا دی جائے، یہ وہ زمانہ تھا جب ایتھنز میں جمہوریت کی بحالی کے بعد عام معافی کا اعلان کیا جا چکا تھا۔ اس لیے مخالفین سقراط پر سیاسی نوعیت کے الزام عائد نہ کرسکے لہذا انہوں نے مذہب اور اخلاقی اصولوں کی بیساکھی استعمال کی۔ سقراط کو کسی زمانے میں طبعی علوم سے شغف تھا اور طبعی فلسفیوں کو بالعموم دہریہ تصور کیا جاتا تھا۔ سقراط ہمیشہ یہ کہتا تھا کہ خود اسے کچھ بھی معلوم نہیں اور اگر وہ دوسروں سے زیادہ عقلمند ہے تو صرف اس اعتبار سے کہ اسے اپنے جہل کا شعور ہے اور دوسرے اپنی لاعلمی سے بے خبر ہیں۔

اپنی صفائی میں سقراط نے عدالت کے روبرو جو کچھ کہا اس کی سب سے زیادہ مربوط اور خوبصورت تصور کشی افلاطون نے کی ہے۔ سقراط نے عائد کردہ الزامات کی پرزور تردید کی اور کہا کہ اگر استغاثے کا دعویٰ ہے کہ اس نے نوجوانوں کے اخلاق کو بگاڑا ہے تو عدالت میںموجود اس کے سابق شاگردوں یا ان شاگردوں کے والدین اور بھائیوں کو استغاثے کی طرف سے گواہی دینے کے لیے طلب کیوں نہیں کیا گیا؟ اس کا جواب کسی کے پاس نہ تھا۔ جب رائے شماری ہوئی تو جیوری کے 281 افراد نے اسے مجرم قرار دیا اور 220 ووٹ اس کی بریت کے لیے تھے اس کے بعد یہ مسئلہ درپیش ہوا کہ سزا کیا دی جاتی ہے۔ بعض جرم کی سزا قانون میں متعین تھی لیکن باقی صورتوں میں مجرم قرار دیے جانے والا شخص اس سزا کی جگہ، جس کا استغاثہ نے مطالبہ کیا ہو، کوئی اور سزا تجویز کرنے کا حق رکھتا تھا اس کے بعد جیوری کے ارکان دونوں سزائوں میں سے کسی ایک کے حق میں فیصلہ سنا دیتے تھے۔ سقراط اگر موت کی سزا کے مقابلے میں جلاوطنی کی سزا تجویز کرتا تو غالب امکان یہی تھا کہ اسے جلا وطن کر دیا جاتا لیکن وہ بالکل ٹس سے مس نہ ہوا۔ شاید وہ یہ سمجھتا ہو کہ اتنی سخت سزا تجویز کرنا اعتراف جرم کے مترادف ہوگا۔ دوستوں سے مشاورت کے بعد جنہوں نے بلاشبہ اسے ایک عقلی اور عملی رویہ اپنانے کو کہا ہوگا اس نے اپنے لیے یہ تجویز کیا کہ وہ تو یہ سمجھتا ہے کہ عوامی محسن کے طور پر وہ ریاست کی طرف سے تاحیات وظیفہ پانے کا مستحق ہے تاہم اپنے احباب کی خواہشات کا احترام کرتے ہوئے وہ تین ہزار درہم کا جرمانہ تجویز کرتا ہے۔ سب کو پتہ تھا کہ سقراط کے پاس اتنی بڑی رقم نہیں ہے اگر اس کا تمام اثاثہ بھی بیچ دیا جائے تو سو سے زائد درہم وصول نہیں ہوتے۔ سقراط کے لاابالی پن کا جیوری نے بہت برا منایا اور جب آخری رائے طلب کی گئی تو پانچ سو ایک اراکین میں سے تین سو نے موت کی سزا کی سفارش کی۔ یہ عدالت کا فیصلہ تھا۔ مگر اب بھی کچھ نہیں بگڑا تھا، اس کے لیے فرار ہو جانا اب بھی ممکن تھا، اس کے ایک دوست نے رشوت دے کر زندان کے داروغہ کو ساتھ ملا لیا۔ اس میں دقت اس لیے بھی نہیں ہوئی تھی کہ ایتھنز کے عمائدین میں سے کوئی بھی دل سے سقراط کی موت کا خواہاں نہ تھا لیکن سقراط نے یہ کہہ کر فرار ہونے سے انکار کر دیا کہ ٴٴکیا میں ان قوانین کی اطاعت نہ کروں جنہوں نے اب مجھے تحفظ فراہم کیا ہے؟ٴٴ اور سقراط نے زہر کا پیالہ پی کر اپنی زندگی ختم کرنے کو ترجیح دی اور یوں آئین اور قانون کی اطاعت اور بالادستی کے لیے اپنی جان دے دی۔

مسیح کو مصلوب کرنے کے احکامات بھی عدالت نے ہی دیے تھے، شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو کا عدالتی قتل بھی ایک سازش کے تحت کیا گیا اور اس کا فیصلہ بھی اس وقت کی عدالت نے دیا تھا مگر آج تاریخ کی عدالت میں ان تمام فیصلوں کو انسانی تاریخ کے بدترین فیصلوں میں شمار کیا جاتا ہے۔ تاریخ کا فیصلہ تلخ مگر درست ہوتا ہے۔ تاریخ یہ بتاتی ہے کہ سقراط اپنے زمانے کی اخلاقی ابتری سے پریشان تھا۔ اور وہ اس رویہ کو شر انگیزی کے طورپر دیکھتا تھا۔ اس زمانے کے ماہر علوم اور پڑھا لکھا طبقہ ہمارے ٹی وی ٹاک شوز کے اینکروں اور ان کے مہمانوں کی طرح پرجوش اور بھانت بھانت کی اصطلاحیں استعمال کرنے کے عادی تھے، خصوصاً آج کل کی بڑی بڑی اصطلاحوں کی طرح، جیسے قوت پر مبنی غیرت، عسکری شجاعت، انصاف وغیرہ لیکن جب سقراط نے ان ماہرین سے پوچھ گچھ کی تو ان میں سے کوئی بھی ان صفات کی جامع تعریف نہ کرسکا ٟبدقسمتی سے اس وقت ان امور پر عمران خان اور شیخ رشید جیسے ماہرین بھی موجود نہیںتھے، جو مختلف ٹاک شوز میں آکر ان کی وضاحت کرسکتےٞ اب سقراط کے نزدیک اگر کسی انصاف یا عقلمندی کا مفہوم ہی معلوم نہیں ہو تو وہ کس منہ سے کہے گا کہ انصاف سے کام لینا چاہیے یا نیکی کرنا چاہیے۔ اگر یہ فرض کر لیا جائے کہ مختلف آدمی ایک ہی لفظ سے مختلف معنی مراد لیتے ہیں جس سے صحیح مفہوم سمجھنا مشکل ہوتا ہے اس سے اخلاقی اور ذہنی افراتفری پیدا ہوتی ہے۔ سقراط خیر کو سمجھنا خیر کو اپنا لینے کے مترادف تصور کرتا ہے۔ یہی فلسفیانہ روش اور قانون کی اطاعت تھی جس نے اس کی زندگی کو زہر کے پیالہ سے ختم کر دیا اور یہ زہر کا پیالہ اسے اس وقت کی اعلیٰ عدلیہ نے دیا تھا۔

پاکستان کی آزاد عدلیہ نے توہین عدالت کیس میں وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی کو سزا کا جو فیصلہ سنایا ہے، اس کا فیصلہ بھی تاریخ کی عدالت کرے گی جس کے اپنے معیار قانون اور دساتیر ہوتے ہیں۔ تاریخ کی عدالت جب اپنا فیصلہ سنائے گی تو وہ صرف یہ نہیں دیکھے گی کہ عدلیہ کے فیصلوں پر کتنا عملدرآمد ہوا؟ وہ یہ بھی دیکھے گی کہ اس عہد میں عوام کے منتخب نمائندہ اداروں کے فیصلوں کو کتنی اہمیت دی گئی ہے اس کے حقوق کے تقدیس کا کس طرح احترام کیا گیا؟ عوام کے منتخب وزیراعظم کی کہیں توہین اور تحقیر تو نہیں کی گئی؟ جس طرح عدلیہ جمہوری حکومت سے اپنے فیصلوں کے احترام کا تقاضا کرتی رہی ہے، تو کیا اس قدر پارلیمنٹ کو بھی قابل احترام تصور کیا گیا ہے؟ تاریخ کی عدالت یہ بھی جانچنے کی کوشش کرے گی کہ کیا دیگر ریاستی ادارے جو نسبتاً عوامی ادارہ سے مضبوط اور طاقتور رہے ہیں ان کا بھی احتساب ہوا ہے، یا نہیں؟ تاریخ کی یہ عدالت یقیناً پاکستان کی متزلزل پارلیمانی جمہوری تاریخ اور موجودہ کٹھن سیاسی ارتقائ کے مراحل کو بھی مدنظر رکھے گی؟ اور پی سی او کے تحت حلف اٹھانے والے ججوں کے حوالے سے بھی اپنا فیصلہ یقینی طورپر محفوظ کیا ہوگا۔ سقراط کی طرح ہمارے ہاں عوام کے منتخب نمائندوں کو بھی انسانی آزادیوں اور جدید فکر کے فروغ پر سزائیِں ہوئی ہیں۔ وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی نے بھی کہا ہے کہ انہیں آئین کے تحفظ پر سزا ہوئی ہے۔ پاکستان کی اعلیٰ عدلیہ کا اس ضمن میں فیصلہ آچکا ہے، مگر ابھی تاریخ کا فیصلہ آنا باقی ہے، دیکھتے ہیں وہ اس ضمن میں کیا فیصلہ دیتی ہے۔ بطور انسانی تاریخ اور جمہوریت کے طالب علم کی حیثیت سے میں یہ سمجھتا ہوں کہ یہ فیصلہ سقراط، مسیح اور بھٹو سے مختلف نہیں ہوں گے۔جہاں تک عوامی عدالت کا تعلق ہے تو وہ اپنا فیصلہ جمشید دستی کیس میں بھی دے چکی ہے اور ابھی اس نے ملتان کے حلقہ پی پی 194میں بھی اپنا فیصلہ سنا دیا ہے۔

Source: Daily Mashriq Lahore

وفاقی وزیراطلاعات و نشریات نے ایک ٹی وی ٹاک شو میں حکومت اور پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کا موقف بڑے شاندار اور جاندار انداز میں پیش کیا ہے۔

Islamabad Tonight – 27th April 2012 – Qamar Zaman Kaira – Exclusive Interview

Its not the news that sells, its speculation on the news that does. But its never a good omen, when subjudice legal cases become subject to speculation, its almost as heinous as gambling, perhaps even more.

Talk shows and talking head pundits are all full of many speculations, headlines full of odd connotations. All making sure that facts of the situation is buried deep inside a pile of made up sensationalism that sells.

Pakistan’s Supreme Court is looking at many important cases, important as they have constitutional implications. One case that gets most media coverage, and is subject to most speculation these days is contempt of court case, where the Prime Minister of Pakistan is indicted to have committed contempt of court.

Yesterday, at a hearing of the contempt case, the advocate for the Prime Minister, Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, argued that bench should rescue itself from making a decision on the contempt case. His arguments were based on a legal principle and provisions of the constitution.

The said legal principle is “Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done” – What this states that where a decision has been made, the decision must be so just to all parties, that there can be no trace of even appearance of judicial bias against any of the affected parties.

Implying above, Barrister Ahsan stated that Article 10-A of the constitution states “in any criminal charge against him a person shall be entitled to a fair trial and due process.”

One of the basic requirements of a due process is that all parties should be provided a right of full hearing before a judgement is passed against them.

Recalling an earlier judgement made by the same bench in January, where the court had provided six options, Barrister Ahsan argued, the court had given a judgement against his client. The evidentiary hearing was latter provided to the Prime Minister. So effectively, court had made its mind up, even before hearing the Prime Minister. Barrister Ahsan also alluded to the language used towards the Prime Minister in the decision, where he was said to be ‘harping’ on about immunity and that Prime Minister has already broken his oath. He stated that this did not give him confidence that court had not made its mind up, even before hearing the Prime Minister.

The judges were hard pressed, and reassured the Barrister that they would ensure that justice is done. Going back to the legal principle, it is not that whether court are or are not actually bias. Its that they must not be ‘seen’ to be bias.

It may be recalled that earlier, Barrister Ahsan had sought an intra-court appeal to 8 different justices, against the earlier decision. That appeal was rejected, and the decision of the 7 justices was upheld. In that, by raising this issue, Barrister has created a predicament for the court. Effectively, Barrister Ahsan has argued that by giving a decision before hearing the Prime Minister, and that decision being upheld by the latter bench, means that whole of Supreme Court has decided on the matter without hearing the Prime Minister. They have already made up their mind, that the Prime Minister was in contempt. Upholding their earlier decision would only strengthen this notion.

The substantive argument in relation to contempt proceedings have remained the same by the Prime Minister’s Lawyer. That 1. President enjoys immunity from any international proceedings due to customary international law and that 2. even if 1 is not correct, Prime Minister was advised this is the case by his legal advisers, thus Prime Minister is not at fault.

It must be recalled that to be guilty of contempt of court, Prime Minister must be ‘malicious’ in his actions, actions taken on based of advise (even if bad advise) and done with good faith, would not constitute malicious.

Pakistan’s Shia Muslims are currently considering a long march to protest against the anti-Shia bias of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. The exact date for the long march is expected to be announced shortly after due consultations with all persecuted communities.

CJ Chaudhry has long-standing family ties with Jihadi-sectarian terrorists. He is a close relative of Punjab government’s law minister Rana Sanaullah, who is a known affiliate of Jihadi-sectarian organization Sipha-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP, renamed as Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat ASWJ).

Pakistan’s Shia Muslims have quite a few misgivings against CJ Chaudhry which include but are not limited to:

1. No suo moto action to stop the ongoing target killing of Shia Muslims in Pakistan (in the last 6 months alone, more than 240 Shias have been target killed by Pakistan army-backed Jihadi sectarian militants ASWJ-SSP, Taliban etc);

2. Acquittal of arrested Jihadi-sectarian terrorists (Malik Ishaq, Hafiz Saeed, Qari Saifullah Akhtar etc);

3. No summoning of government ministers and army commanders to explain their inability to stop Shia genocide in Pakistan;

4. Rejection of Shia rights activists’ petition asking for SCP’s intervention to stop Shia genocide.

Shia Muslims are not the only community to have felt betrayed by CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry, other persecuted groups such as the Baloch, Pashtun, Sunni Barelvi, Ahmadi etc have similar feelings towards CJ Chaudhry. For example, this editorial by The Baloch Hal: The man who betrayed Balochistan

We welcome the proposed protest against a pro-army, pro-Jihadi Chief Justice. We suggest that it’s not only Shias but also moderate Sunnis, Ahmadis, Christians, Balochs, Pashtuns etc who should march together towards Islamabad in support of human rights and demonstrate right in front of the Supreme Court’s building and also outside Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s residence.

Video on Shia genocide in Pakistan and a message to Pakistan’s Chief Justice and Army Chief

From Gilgit to Karachi, Quetta to Parachinar and Karachi to D.I.Khan, Shia Muslims are being target killed in all provinces and areas of Pakistan. However, Pakistan’s judiciary, army, politicians, civil society and media either remain silent or misrepresent the Shia genocide. This video is a message to all of them particularly to the champions of justice and national security.

Kia tum bhool gaye? Pakistani media’s silence on Shia genocide

Dhoondo Ge Agar Mulkon Mulkon: A tribute to Shias martyred by ISI-backed ASWJ-SSP-Taliban

When a woman hits another woman, in normal cases it’s an assault. If there are many witnesses, good, the assailant gets punished quickly. Open and Shut case, we move on. But Pakistan doesn’t do normal; even our assaults have deeper meanings and ramifications behind them.

The Act
When the, now MPA, Waheeda Shah slapped an on duty election official. This was uncalled for, even if the official had herself placed ballots right in front of the candidate. Violence is never acceptable. What makes the situation worse is that only reason Ms. Shah did slap the officials is because she has this sense of entitlement. As she belongs to a higher caste, being more socially higher and is much more affluent, she felt she can slap her lesser. This is not new or radical and happens almost regularly. What was different is that whole incident was caught in camera and televised throughout.
As always, the very elite who batter their lesser on daily basis woke up as horrified as to what they were seeing. Much like when you see yourself on the video taken by someone else, is that how I look? Only that no one here seems to recognise themselves and have started to prepare a pyre to burn that witch.
Some members of Sindh found it unbearable to sit with such a woman. Oddly no one found it unbearable when the then CM Arbab Rahim slapped people, with same contempt and sense of entitlement.
There is an immediate need to bring about a change in attitudes of the more affluent to treat others with respect. There is very little of this in our society.

The Win

Waheeda Shah was running on a general seat. She eventually won her election, making her only the second woman to win on the general seat in the Sindh Parliament. An important milestone for woman of Sindh, one might say, yet ironically this is a woman who has beaten another weaker woman in public, just because she could!
The Suo Moto
Influenced not at all by media rampant reporting and any personal grievances, the Chief Justice of Pakistan promulgated a Suo Moto action against the now elected MPA. Everytime a Suo-moto is taken by the highest court in such a fashion, the due process is severely affected. Trying to explain such intermediation, in the while where there was already an FIR lodged; CJP stated that to him this incident was worse than cold-blooded killing of a boy by a trigger happy Ranger official. Perhaps he meant the underlying social issues that lurk within the slap, but he made no mention of them. He did mention that this showed inadequacy of the Election Commission to provide full security and showed lack of security to public official, though Suo-Moto was taken on this one incident and not on other incidents of shootings that also occurred in Punjab. No wait, sorry I forgot slapping is more harmful than guns. Suo-Moto wasn’t also on overall lack of security provided by EC, with all the incidents that happened that day. It was for that one slap, by a PPP MPA. Incidentally no Suo-Motos for the killings of many Shias.
A better way may have been to advice a session court judge and Sindh IGP to direct the investigations to ensure no influence is done. It is not a perfect scenario, but if the CJP wants there to be a structural change then he should at least let law run its course, for once.

The Apology and the Forgiveness
When Waheeda Shah was shown the video of her actions, she apologised for it. She also sought apology from the Chief Justice at the Suo moto hearing. This did not end the case, and the hearing was said to continue for next date.
Subsequently the official who was slapped by the Waheeda Shah came out with a statement, saying she forgives her assailant after former had apologised. After this the Election Commission decided to close the case. Similarly the FIR too would now be in jeopardy. Similar to case of Raymond Davis, being freed after family of his victims forgave him. Oddly enough while following the Islamic injunctions, Waheeda Shah would have no case against her, but the Suo Moto is not based on any Islamic injunctions but has an underpinning in the common law. These proceedings can still continue, as they are independent of the victim’s right to seek redress. This is odd because Islamic provisions in this case allow the MPA to go free, yet the SC court that has expressed high regard for ensuring and introducing Islamic law and principles, would be using common law to redress the situation, to come to a conclusion as they see fit.
As I said, it’s not a normal assault – we don’t do normal.

Najam Sethi is the Quaid-e-Azam of liberal elites

In presenting the current Judiciary and hyper ventilating media as a counter to Pakistan’s military establishment, (Overreach and Miscalculation, Friday Times Editorial, February 17^th-24^th, 2012) Najam Sethi remains consistent in his intellectual dishonesty.  While presenting a token critique of the army; at odds with his recent advocacy of it– Najam shiftily tries to present the Judiciary and the media as anti-establishment institutions:

…there are two new and powerful contenders in the equation. The judiciary under Chief justice Iftikhar Chaudry has unprecedentedly pushed the military on the defensive for being unaccountable (the Mehrangate affair of 1990, disappearances and murder of Baloch and Taliban extremists in captivity). And the electronic media is reaching tens of millions of Pakistanis and courageously raising their consciousness. Neither will countenance any direct or indirect military intervention in politics.

The evidence is quite the opposite to these absurd claims made by Mr. Sethi.  In the last few months, the Judiciary has openly allied with the military establishment.  Refer  to ANALYSIS: Pakistan constitution in jeopardy —Tausif Kamal  where the author, an attorney at law, details how two “frivolous petitions” accepted by the Supreme Court and the proceedings conducted therein, have not only created a constitutional crisis but also directly favoured the military establishment:

The recent improper admission by our Supreme Court (SC) of a ‘petition’ filed by an unaffected non-party seeking to prevent the executive branch from exercising its constitutional powers to take any future action against army generals is another nail in the coffin of the supremacy of constitutional rule in Pakistan. It seems that the admissions of both the memo petition as well as this COAS/DG ISI petition were in brazen violation of the constitution and in wanton disregard of the established principle of separation of powers of the three branches of our government enshrined in our constitution. The admission of the memo petition and ordering a commission by the SC usurped the power and authority of the legislative branch, since the parliamentary committee was already seized of this matter and were properly conducting hearings, while the admission of this COAS/DG ISI petition infringes upon the inherent powers of the executive branch under the constitution to hire and fire all government officers, including the army generals.

It seems that Mr. Sethi picked the wrong time to pass off his chauvinist, pro-establishment views.  An excellent report by Messrs Asad Jamal and Muhammad Badar Alam (“On Trial”, February 16, 2012, HERALD) presented a far more balanced picture.  Here are some important quotes by prominent legal experts and political economists:

Dr Osama Siddique, associated with the department of law and policy at the Lahore University of Management Sciences (Lums), says three historical trends concerning the superior judiciary continue to have resonance in the present context. “One, the judiciary has had an invasive and power-accumulation propensity that is also characterised by illusions of self- grandeur; two, it is historically anti-PPP and favours pro-establishment parties which was poignantly displayed in the 1990s; and, three, it has repeatedly evinced a vulnerability to direct and indirect
pressures from the army.

Maryam Khan, an assistant professor of law at Lums, says “The judiciary has always exhibited a tendency to assert an exaggerated constitutional domain for itself and attempts to enhance it through its own pronouncements whenever the army goes in the background and a controlled democratic system is restored.” According to her, the court-centered development of the “public interest litigation” movement in the immediate post-Zia era of the late 1980s and early 1990s is an example of the judiciary’s strategic self-legitimation not only to assert an exaggerated constitutional domain for itself but also to reinvent its image as the custodian of constitutional and democratic values. “ … the judiciary has effectively evolved into an institution autonomous of, ascendant to, as well as deeply contemptuous and dismissive of, the political process,” she says.

Writing in the Economic and Political Weekly as early as 2009, Karachi-based political economist Haris Gazdar was even more scathing in his criticism of the judiciary and its main supporters, the lawyers. He argued that the constitutionalist pretensions of judges and lawyers were belied by their actions. “There is a pattern: media fuelled populism, encroachment upon the authority of the parliament and the executive, helping political allies, and keeping mum where core interests of the military might be involved. From a broadly-supported popular struggle against the Musharraf regime, the lawyers’ movement has morphed into a self-serving power grab,” he wrote.

The most damning verdict is given by Pakistan’s leading human rights champion, Asma Jehangir and supplemented by
another lawyer, Faisal Siddiqi:

Former Supreme Court Bar Association president Asma Jahangir has publicly accused the Supreme Court of working “under influence of the security establishment” in the memo case. Those who support her point of view cite many long-pending cases, including those involving violence in Balochistan and missing persons, in which the apex court has never gone beyond summoning senior intelligence officials. Talking about the memo case, for instance, Sidiqqi says “unlike in the past when the army asked for legitimacy from the court, in the memo case the army is not asking for validation of its unconstitutional acts.” What it is doing, and seemingly achieving is even more troubling. “It has instead sought to increase its de facto power as opposed to its de jure power by using the judicial process.” As and when that power gets validated through a Supreme Court judgement, the army will be placed way above the democratic and parliamentary process. This in turn will put elected governments at the mercy of a security establishment controlling everything from behind the scenes, and without having to worry about law and
Constitution.”

Both these reports are prepared by lawyers and include leading lights of the controversial lawyer’s movement.  One must appreciate and understand the fact that not only are these lawyer’s displaying an admirable character in objectively critiquing the judiciary whom they helped restore.  They are also taking great risk in this endeavor because this judiciary has already shown its petty, insecure and bullying nature against the PPP government.  In lynching the PPP-government for upholding the Constitution, this Judiciary has rejected bail petitions for an incarcerated senior PPP minister since the last two years.   Of course, when it comes to PPP elected leaders and ministers, the “lack of evidence” argument assumes an altogether opposite meaning than when it is applied to boastful, mass murdering Jihadis like Malik Ishaq.

His deep hatred for the Pakistan People’s Party and a soft corner for the military establishment blinds Sethi blind to any rational or objective analysis.  He sinks to new journalistic lows when he indirectly presents PTI’s political currents (without naming them but referring
to key buzzwards such as “Tsunami”, “Change” that are associated with it) as an expression of anti-establishment.  The PTI and its hotch-potch of recycled Punjabi nationalism are anything but anti-establishment – a fact that has come as a rude shock to its chic urban supporters now horrified with their parties open dalliances with violent ISI-backed Islamist militias.

In a timely article in today’s DAWN Aqil Shah writes:

If the honourable judges can readily indict the country’s highest elected official for failing to implement its NRO decision, they should also directly summon the army chief (rather than the hapless defence minister or secretary) to account for the serious offence of alleged extrajudicial torture and murders in the custody of military intelligence agencies.

Herein lies the crux of the issue which is the deep-rooted dishonesty on the part of Mr. Sethi.  The Judiciary is an essential component and collaborator of the Pakistani security State.  Similarly,  Pakistan’s media, barring the odd exception, parrots and protects the security establishment.  Contrary to Mr. Sethi’s  opinion piece,  the Judges and journalists are an essential component of what is known in local parlance as the Teen(3)-Jeem alliance.  Occasionally, these three components present a shallow criticism of one another but in the long term, they have consistently been the dark troika  against elected democracy in Pakistan – especially if that government happens to be a PPP government.  They have always been willing bed fellows as their elitest, xenophobic and parochial views support the warped security paradigm defined by the military establishment.

Even in the missing person’s case, the Supreme Court has only gone so far as the 11 non-Baloch prisoners suspected of belonging to Jihadist causes.  This reflects not just tokenism but a pronounced Islamist and anti-Baloch bias.  Hundreds of Baloch youth have been disappeared in an area controlled by the Frontier Constabulary – an army auxillary.  After manipulating public sentiment on this issue and engaging in crass populism that hardly befits a judiciary, the Supreme Court has done no more than engaging in cheap tactics. It has issued stern-sounding but legally toothless comments to low ranking officers – in direct contrast to hauling up a unanimously elected Prime Minister for the crime of upholding the Constitution.

Sadly, given his historical hatred of the Pakistan Peoples Party and a Punjabi chauvinism that cannot look beyond the GT road politics of Lahore-Rawalpindi-GHQ-Aabpara, Sethi cannot bring himself to give any credit to a Seriaki Prime Minister for his graceful and courageous stance against Judicial tyranny.  After all,  this is the same Najam Sethi whose semi-public campaign of abuse and vitriol against Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto during the mid-1990′s is remembered by many in the journalist community. His crass opportunism to join the Caretaker setup following another coup against an elected government hardly befits a journalist.

However, for the “Shady Mafia” as his lobby group is known as, such ethics don’t matter.  Budding young journalists of promise as well as foreign journalists and commentators are worked over in well funded charm initiatives drives.  Most get sucked into the vortex of the “Shady Mafia”.  Before long they are regurgating the same pro establishment drivel on various forums.  This is part of Pakistan’s blocked elite who hold up Najam “Shady” as a paragon of liberalism, when in essence, he is the most sauve spokesperson for the military establishment.

This coalition consists of Judiciary, Establishment and PML-N with news retail outlets as their spokespersons. Mansoor Ijaz, a self projecting US citizen with Pakistani origin, has done many things to gain recognition in matters relating to Pak & US relationship. The man has been in news mostly for his negative involvement in such matters. To his credit he has appeared as commentator in a semi-porn women’s wrestling video. He is also credited for the involvement in dissolution of Benazir’s second government and then rightly so has criticized ISI and Pak Army. He even wrote articles suggesting US to declare ISI as “Terrorist Organization” (rightly so) due to its support to Taliban in Pakistan & Afghanistan.

But one fine morning, the ISI chief is meeting this same individual in UK for investigating the so called memo which was claimed to have been written by him on the directions of Pakistan’s US ambassador Hussain Haqqani. In the world of Looney toons they became new friends and opened up another front against the democratically elected government. They took the newly created Super Highway to stone wall democracy via Supreme Court. The SC which in last three years has established itself as one of the fiercest political force to reckon with, led by a person who has very chequered past as its chairman Iftikhar Choudhry went into a over drive.

Poor Iftikhar Choudhry is so gullible that he said ameen to the words coming out of the mouth of our lord Chief Of Army (Sipah e Salar). Iftikhar Choudhry forgot another Siph e Salar Musharraf said alot about him so that must also be true.

On the other hand the sudden release of the confidential meeting notes between Nawaz Sharif’s Swiss ambassador Inam Ullah and the investigating judge of SGS-Cotecna. Those confidential notes clearly describe the pressure Pak Ambassador put on him, judge in reply refused to indict Benazir & Zardari for money laundering as there was not enough evidence. The case met the same fate in Pakistan when audio tapes of LHC judge Justice Qayyum’s conversation with Nawz & Shabaz’s accountability point man Saif Ur Rehman. Whole establishment, Judiciary, Anti government parties, Media and so called civil society is crying at the top of their lungs with the firm knowledge of the credibility of the case.

Other part relating to the Swiss case is the immunity given to the presiden under the constittion. CBDG wants President to let go of the immunity, some circles of coalition even wants this immunity to be removed from the constitution.

CBDG must have to rethink their strategy. With the sudden appearance of leaked Swiss document and credibility of their star witness in Memo scandal coalition is once again putting its heads together for new adventurism. We have to wait and see their new move.

The derailment of democracy in the second decade of 21st century has taken a new twist. last decade of last century saw Army taking action against democracy and then one of its trooper jumps in to take control and judiciary quickly validating all the illegal steps. In new formula army has totally change the scenario they bring down the government thru judiciary rather than going to it afterwards.