Yet, another summon to an elected Prime Minister by the ISI-backed Supreme Court to explain his position on on 13 February for not witting the much wanted letter to Swiss courts to re-open politically motivated graft cases against President Zardari of Pakistan.

Earlier, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani appeared in the court on 19 January 2012 to explain why he should not be charged with contempt for failing to re-open the old, politically motivated corruption cases against President Asif Ali Zardari.

He categorically stated: “We respect the courts…my intention is to respect the constitution and my associates also respect the constitution.” and he emphasised that “I decided to appear before the court immediately after getting the notice”.

Unlike Nawaz Sharif, PM Gilani did not attack the judiciary by stimulating his party loyalists. Readers might remember that on 28 November 1997, Nawaz Sharif had attacked the apex court when he was summoned for hearing of contempt case against him. He blasted the SC Like dictators. But on the other hand, Prime Minister of PPP made history by not taking unconstitutional and immoral step against SC. Truly, a heroic act indeed, in Third World countries it is a rarity to see such high sanity and morality. I salute Prime Minsiter yousuf Raza Gilani.

Ironically, PM Gilani the man who restored judiciary and honored all judges who were sacked by the military dictator General Musharaf. In the last four years Prime Minister Gilani has done his best to maintain the system of trichotomy of power. The executive has gone all out to defend the system of trichotomy of power envisaged in the constitution of Pakistan. Regarding the executive and the judiciary, the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, has described a system of trichotomy of power. The constitution assigns the Supreme Court a unique responsibility of maintaining harmony and balance between the three pillars of the state, namely, Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. The idea is to ensure that the state organs perform their respective functions within the stipulated limits and constraints.

As a guardian of the constitution, the court is required to “preserve, protect and defend” this document. But it is very sad that the current judiciary under the Lordship of CJ Iftikhtar Chaudhry (a cousin of PML-N’s Rana Sanullah of Sipah-e-Sahaba) has failed to maintain harmony and balance between the pillars of state. The number of NRO beneficiaries is 8041. So far, only one person, the elected president of Pakistan, has been targeted and the remaining 8040 people seem to be exempted from accountability. Is this not against national interests?

As far as the President is concerned, Swiss cases are no more an issue as former Swiss Attorney General Daniel Zappeli clarified that the “Swiss courts cannot reopen the cases against President Zardari due to the immunity he enjoys as President.” The furore must die down as the international law also provides immunity to President Zardari.

We have practical examples of France and Sudan regarding this. The French courts do not take action against Sarkozy for his alleged involvement in the submarine scandal, allegedly done while he was not the president and the Sudanese president is not being arrested due to his sovereign immunity anywhere in the world despite an International Criminal Court warrant against him, for violations he did while in office. President Zardari is the lawfully elected president and is as such immune from any legal action under the article 248 of the Constitution.

PM Gilani was right when he chose not to write a letter to Swiss courts to re-open politically motivated graft cases against President of Pakistan. Mr Chief Justice should follow the constitution of Pakistan because our country cannot afford to have any further clashes between institutions, against the backdrop of a faltering economy, widespread poverty and a bloody war with Islamist militant groups.

ملکوںاور تہذیبوں کی تاریخ انسانوں کی تاریخ ہوتی ہے۔ مگر پاکستان کی تاریخ قائداعظم سے لے کر اب جمہوری بحرانوں کی تاریخ ہے۔ جنرل ایوب خان سے جنرل یحیی سے جنرل ضیا الحق اورجنرل مشرف تک، بحرانوں کی بڑی ذمہ داری ‘وردی پوش’ سیاست دانوں پر عائد ہوتی ہے۔ جو کسی وقت بھی ‘سفید پوش ‘ سیاست دانوں کو گھر بھیج کر شیروانی پہن کر حلف اٹھالیتے ہیں، اور پی سی او کے گناہ کو سینے پر سجانے والی عدلیہ حکمرانی کی سند عطا کردیتی ہے۔ پھر یہ حلف پورے سماج کا ‘آپریشن’ بن جاتا ہے۔ مختلف نوعیت کی بیماریوں کے شفا خانےکھل جاتے ہیں، اور نیم حکیم خطرہ جاں کا محاورہ سچ لگنے لگتاہے۔

یہ بھی سچ ہے کہ جمہوریت کے نام پر بننے والی حکومتیں بھی جمہور کے استحصال کا سبب بن سکتی ہیں۔ مگر جمہوریت کے پراسیس کو جمہوری پراسیس سے بدلنے کی بجاۓ اسے غیر ائینی طور یکسر توڑ دینا ‘ہوس اقتدار’ کے سواء کچھ بھی نہیں۔ اسمبلیوں کو ان کی ائینی معیاد پوری کرنے کے بعد عوام کے سامنے جانا چاہیے تاکہ وہ انہیں رد یا قبول کرسکیں۔ یہی جمہوری عمل ہے۔ اسی سفر پر چلنے سے جمہوری اقدار فروغ پاتی ہیں، اسی سے جمہوریت استحکام حاصل کرتی ہے۔ جمہوریت کی خامیاں مذید جمہوریت سے ہی دور ہوتی ہیں۔ جمہوریت عام اور حاکم کے مابین تضادات کو ساکت نہین کرتی بلکہ عوام کو حکمرانوں کے انتخاب، اپنے فیصلے پر نظر ثانی اور تبدیلی کا اختیار دیتی ہے۔

اس جمہوری عمل کو منقطع کرنے کی سازش سے پاکستان آج پھر بحرانوں سے دوچار نظر آتا ہے۔ جمہوریت کو ناکام کرنے کے لۓ غیر نمائندہ ریاستی ادارے اور ان کی کنگز پارٹی اور بالخصوص پنجاب کی حکومتی جماعت پاکستان مسلم لیگ نواز ہر غیر جمہوری اورناجائز حربہ استعمال کر رہی ہے۔

یہ بھی ایک حقیقت ہے کہ ہماری عدلیہ بھی پاکستان کی سیاست اور جمہوریت کو فیصلہ کن رخ دینے میں اہم کردار ادا کرتی رہی ہے، جس سے فوجی آمروں کے لۓ فضا سازگار رہی ہے۔ پاکستانی تاریخ کے سب سے بڑے عدالتی بحران، جو مارچ2007 کو چیف جسٹس اف پاکستان کے خلاف صدارتی ریفرنس، سپریم جوڈیشل کونسل کو بھیجنے کے بعد ہوا تھا، اس کے نتیجے میں چیف جسٹس کی بحالی کے ساتھ، عدلیہ کی آزادی کی بھی تحریک چلی۔ خواب یہ تھا کہ شاید جوڈیشل ملٹری الائنس ٹوٹ جاۓ اور عدلیہ کی آزادی سے ریاست نیشل سیکیورٹی سٹیٹ سے نیشنل ویلفیئر سٹیٹ بن جاۓ۔ ‘ریاست ہوگئ ماں کے جیسی’ چودھری اعتزازاحسن کا بھی یہی خواب لگتا تھا۔

مگرصد افسوس یہ خواب، خواب ہی رہا۔ آج بھی عدالت کو انسانی آفاقی بنیادی حقوق سے ذیادہ قومی سلامتی اہم نظر آرہی ہے جو ایک ‘کاغذ کے ٹکڑے’ سے ‘سہمی اور خوف ذدہ’ نظر آتی ہے۔ ہیومن رائٹس کمیشن آف پاکستان کی رپورٹس اورآبزرویشن کے مطابق، پاکستان کی عدلیہ سیاسی مقدمات میں الجھ کر انسانی آفاقی بنیادی حقوق سے متعلقہ مقدمات کو نظر انداذ کررہی ہے۔ سپریم کورٹ بار ایسوسیشن کے موجودہ صدریاسین آذاد اور سابقہ صدر عاصمہ جہانگیر کا یہ کہنا ہے کہ ‘میمو’ قابل سماعت نہیں تھا اور عدلیہ سیاست کو عدالت میں لے آئ ہے۔ سیاسی معاملات میں الجھ کر عدلیہ کا وقارمتاثر ہو رہا ہے۔ چونکہ عدالت سیاسی نوعیت کے کیسزمیں مصروف ہے، لہذا عام آدمی کو انصاف نہیں مل رہا، 18 لاکھ سے زائد مقدمات ججز کی توجہ کے منتظر ہیں، لاپتہ افراد کے لواحقین بھی آس لگاۓ بیٹھے ہیں۔ مگر اس طرف کسی کی نظر نہیں جاتی۔

ججز بحالی تحریک کے روح رواں علی احمد کرد بھی عدلیہ کی اس سیاسی روش سے خوش دکھائ نہیں دیتے۔ کرد صاحب ایک آزاد منش صوفی شخصیت کے مالک ہیںاور ان کی تمام عمرجمہوریت کی سربلندی میں گزری ہے، ججز بحالی تحریک میں انہوں نے بے انتہا صعوبتیں اور مشکلات برداشت کی، مگر وقت بہت ظالم اور بے رحم ہوتاہے۔

اب چونکہ ‘آذاد عدلیہ کو شیخ رشید اور اکرم شیخ جیسے نۓ مگر آزمودہ محافظوں اور سپہ سالاروں کی حمایت اور خدمات حاصل ہے، لہذا آذاد میڈیا پرعلی احمد کرد کے لیۓ سپیس نہیں بنتی۔

بہرحال بہادر اور سچے لوگوں کو اپنے موقف کے لۓ تھوڑی سپیس ہی بہت ہے، انہیں شیخ رشید اور عمران خان کی طرح ہر ٹاک شو میں قبصےکی ضرورت نہیں، مہر بخاری کے ٹاک شو ‘کراس فائیر’ میں گفتگو فرماتے ہوۓ علی احمد کرد نے عدلیہ کے سیاسی حکومتی امور میں ‘جوڈیشل ایکٹیوازم’ پر اپنے خدشات کا اظہار دبے مگر واضع انداذ میں کیا ہے۔ ان کے نزدیک عدلیہ اپنے دائرہ اختیار سے تجاوزکررہی ہے۔ ان کا کہنا ہے کہ ایک جمہوریت پسند کی حیشیت سے انہیں عوام کی اجتماعی دانش پراعتماد ہے، جس کا اظہارصرف پارلیمنٹ ہی کرسکتی ہے کوئ اورادارہ نہیں، اور ‘میمو’ کے معاملےمیں وہ پارلیمانی کمیشن کا فیصلہ ہی مانیں گے۔ ان کا تفصیلی انٹرویو ‘قارئین اور ناظرین’ کی خدمت میں پیش کیا جارہا ہے۔

Originally Posted at: Pakistan Today

Top leaders of Pakistan Army decided in a meeting last week that they would make no compromises on ‘national security’, and according to reports, also promised to provide protection to Mansoor Ijaz – the man who said the army “breeds hatred among Pakistan’s Islamist masses and then uses their thirst for jihad against Pakistan’s neighbours and allies to sate its hunger for power”.

Mansoor Ijaz may come to Pakistan to testify against former ambassador Husain Haqqani.

It is not clear if Haqqani collaborated with Ijaz to write a controversial memo asking the US to depose Pakistan’s top military leaders, but his travel documents have reportedly been confiscated, he is not allowed to leave the country, he is hiding in the Prime Minister’s House because he fears for his life, and he will likely be charged with treason. But it is clear that Mansoor Ijaz did write the memo. It is ironic that he has been promised security by the very army he had asked the US to act against. If the memo was a conspiracy against Pakistan, why is army supporting one of the conspirators? What are the legal implications of such a move?

It is not clear whether Husain Haqqani violated any regulations, but he was summoned, questioned, and made to resign before the probe began although he was in no position to influence the probe.

But it is clear the ISI chief did not inform the prime minister before or after he met Mansoor Ijaz, although he is required to report to him. He was not made to resign, although he is in a position of influence. When the prime minister made statements that the military must follow the constitution, the army warned of “grievous consequences” through a press release.

Apparently, Shahbaz Sharif was more upset about the statement than the military itself. His elder brother Nawaz Sharif, one of Pakistan’s top politicians, has taken the issue to the Supreme Court doing exactly what the army had wanted him to do. Earlier, he had said in public meetings that the ISI was supporting his rival Imran Khan.

The government is fighting with both the judiciary and the military, and it must go, a key leader from his party said in a TV debate. When his opponent reminded him his own party’s government had fought with the judiciary and the military before it was deposed in 1999, he admitted it was a mistake. Nawaz Sharif and his party had also made appeals to the US to support his government against the military. Some of the judges who had given a legal cover to the 1999 coup are still part of the Supreme Court. The top court of Pakistan took up the memo case before several other matters of public interest as they too vowed to protect ‘national security’.

Haqqani’s lawyer Asma Jahangir said the court gave the petitioners relief more than they had asked for, and decided that ‘national security’ was more important than her client’s fundamental rights.

“I am also a parent and a citizen of this country and feel concerned,” Justice Jawad S Khwaja said in a comment during the hearing. But judges do not show similar concern in the ongoing cases in which ISI is accused of breaking rules, such as picking people up without due process, or funding conservative political parties in elections against the PPP.

The judges did not even show concern when the military promised to protect Mansoor Ijaz, the man who admits he wrote the memo that could jeopardise Pakistan’s ‘national security’.

Meanwhile, Imran Khan has promised to rally towards Islamabad and topple the government that the people of Pakistan had elected for five years. Most of the political leaders he will be flanked with were part of the previous military regime and have recently left the party believed to be backed by the military establishment. They will try to usurp power from a legitimate civilian government that includes leaders who opposed them when they were in power with a uniformed president.

President Zardari has been in jail for about a decade over charges of corruption of which none was proven. The people who had made those cases later admitted they were made under pressure from the military establishment.

If everybody else’s actions are past and closed transactions, why must Zardari hang? And if Zardari must hang, everyone must hang.

The writer is a media and culture critic and works at The Friday Times.He tweets @paagalinsaan and gets email at harris@nyu.edu

This Parliament has also passed more than 70 bills. Legislatively, this National Assembly has been one of the most proactive and efficient.

The 35-year-old legislator speaks about Pakistan’s Mexican standoff, and Parliament’s unsung feats.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani was served a contempt of court notice by the Supreme Court on Jan. 16. And, rejecting the government’s position, the Army considers Memogate to be a real issue. Do you believe Pakistani democracy is in danger?

The only solution to Pakistan’s problems is democracy and plenty of it. Participation in the electoral process by everyone—especially the young, and women—and uninterrupted democracy are critical requirements for the country’s long-term stability and economic growth. We need to keep the system going irrespective of who comes to power, even if it’s Nawaz Sharif.

How do you view the recent success of Imran Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf?

Their Lahore rally [on Oct. 30] attracted a lot of people, who were curious to hear what Imran Khan had to say. Right now, they’re only attracting crowds. They have to convert their popularity into votes. Anyone who wants to participate in the electoral process should be given a fair chance, and PTI’s success in exciting potential, first-time voters is a good bellwether for Pakistani politics. The party they’re most likely to affect is the PMLN, then PMLQ, and then perhaps the PPP.

Is Memogate a cause of concern for you as a member of the ruling party?

This issue should not be allowed to derail the solid working relationship the government has had with the military. I don’t see this becoming a real threat, but it is a sensitive issue.

The current Parliament passed two constitutional amendments but is still derided as a “rubberstamp assembly.” Does the criticism have any validity?

This Parliament has also passed more than 70 bills. Legislatively, this National Assembly has been one of the most proactive and efficient. Compare this to the Punjab Assembly, where they’ve only made something like a dozen new laws over the last four years, with no private member’s bill being entertained. Prime Minister Gilani, Speaker Mirza, and the party whips have led Parliament well. I’ve personally worked on laws to clean up the civil service by enforcing merit and ensuring the declaration of assets, to penalize squatters, to make cyber bullying and harassment punishable crimes, to have telecom companies regulate the retail of phone numbers, to make new provinces, to have Parliament’s say in foreign policy.

Are other freshman legislators similarly charged about their responsibilities?

There are a lot of young parliamentarians, men and women, who are making a difference by proposing new legislation and introducing commitment in highly informed debates. These people have good ideas.

Source: News Week Pakistan

The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) has directed Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to appear before it on Thursday to explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him. The contempt charges emanate from Gilani not carrying out the court’s 2009 orders in the National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007 (NRO) case.

The NRO, 2007 had been signed and put into effect by the then military ruler of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, and let over 8,000 people against whom a variety of cases—many concocted out of sheer political vengeance—were pending at various stages of the legal process off the hook. The most prominent beneficiaries of this reconciliation were late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and her spouse, the current President Asif Ali Zardari. Besides, thousands from the ethnic political party Muttahida Qaumi Movement were given reprieve under the NRO making the party the largest beneficiary of the law.

The NRO was negotiated between Musharraf and the current army Chief, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who headed the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Bhutto. International players from the United Kingdom, the United States and perhaps the Gulf sheikhs are said to have guaranteed the deal, which paved the way for Bhutto’s return and indirectly of another former Primer Minister-in-exile Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan, and safe exit from the country, down the road, of Musharraf.

The restoration of the democratic dispensation that flowed from the much-maligned NRO also allowed Gilani, an elected Prime Minister, to first release the Judges of superior judiciary who were under house arrest and later restore them to their office. The restitution of these Judges, however, was not an easy task and ultimately required street protests by lawyers and opposition parties along with a facilitating nod/prod from General Kayani. This delay on part of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), notably Zardari, to allow the country’s Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to resume office was perceived as an affront by the latter.

Zardari, on his part, was apprehensive of the judiciary’s past attitude towards the PPP and himself. After all, the same Judges seeking his blessings for restoration stood by and did nothing for a good decade when he was put through the wringer of lawsuits (several if not all fabricated). He was denied justice for way too long to easily forget the role of the Judges in his ordeal.

Bad blood has existed between Pakistani politicians and the judiciary for the better part of the country’s existence. In tussles between various power centers like the military and the civil bureaucracy on one side versus democratic and even quasi-democratic forces on the other, the judiciary has invariably sided with the former two. The Pakistani superior judiciary has been, to its dubious credit, legitimising military takeovers and abrogation of the Constitution.

The SC has validated multiple martial laws and granted protection to military usurpers under the garb of what it called the ‘doctrine of necessity’—a perverted concept defined by the second Chief Justice of Pakistan, Muhammad Munir, as “that which is not otherwise lawful, necessity makes lawful”. Justice Munir had also inducted two other mutations to the legal corpus that “the safety of the people is the supreme law” and “the safety of the State is the supreme law” thereby providing a judicial cover to the national security state paradigm.

Under Article 6 of the Constitution, such actions of the judiciary effectively were treasonous as they actively aided and abetted those who had subverted the Constitution. Even worse is the fact that the superior judiciary’s hands are stained with the blood of the country’s first elected Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whose judicial murder was the result of connivance between military dictator Zia-ul-Haq and Judges aimed at eliminating Bhutto. Therein, lies the single-most important reason for the mistrust between the PPP and the SC.

Historically, courts have been the venue for prosecuting numerous other activists and politicians on treason allegations. They have ranged from Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Comrade Sajjad Zahir (Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case), Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman (Agartala Conspiracy Case), Afrasiab Khattak and Pashtun progressives (Malakand Conspiracy case), Wali Khan and Baloch nationalist leaders (Hyderabad Conspiracy Case) to Makhdoom Javed Hashmi in the recent past. And all this was done in the name of national security and fundamental rights—specifically the Right to Liberty— were made subservient to the security of the state as has been done by the SC in its order in the so-called Memogate case.

It is in this backdrop that one must see the present three-pronged assault on the incumbent democratic dispensation in Pakistan, which came to power in 2008. The military establishment, certain right-wing politicians and the judiciary have made common cause to oust the PPP and its allies. Large sections of the Pakistani media have served as very effective cheerleaders in this endeavour.

The military, which was ruling directly through General Musharraf, found it increasingly difficult to continue doing so for multiple reasons and was forced to allow at least a civilian veneer while wanting to rule from behind the scenes. The junta reluctantly signed the NRO with the PPP but was unhappy to let the latter rule even in name. Many observers believe that the military’s mistrust of Benazir Bhutto’s understanding with the West, especially the US, her critical views of jihadism as a tool of foreign policy and favouring civilian supremacy over the military might have contributed to her elimination.

No sooner did the PPP assume power, efforts to elbow it out started in earnest. The military flexed its muscle first in 2008-2009 during the so-called Biden-Lugar Bill (later Kerry-Lugar Berman Act) row, where the US, directly and indirectly, wanted to make its military aid to Pakistan conditional to the army’s respect for civilian supremacy. A later attempt by the PPP to bring the ISI under the MoD was also thwarted by the army. The military establishment considered the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani, its enemy number one. To them, Haqqani—an avowed proponent of civilian supremacy—had undone years of efforts by the junta to convince the US that they are the only show in town. Haqqani had to be cut to size, and soon. The quasi-sting operation a la Memogate afforded such opportunity to not just get Haqqani but also to net his boss, President Zardari. But as noted before here, the days of a textbook coup d’état are long gone. A physical takeover by the army would have led to international isolation and domestic turmoil.

This is where the courts became invaluable to the military brass again. The Opposition did not have the numbers in Parliament to impeach Zardari, or vote out the Prime Minister and mobilise the street had not worked so far. If an adverse verdict could be obtained against Haqqani and thus Zardari, it would be a slam-dunk. While some initial negotiations between the PPP and the junta were underway that could have brought closure to the Memogate, the army was actually looking for scalps. It double-crossed the PPP and just as Haqqani arrived in Islamabad, his passport was snatched and he was confined first to the presidency and then the PM House in a virtual house arrest.

Preparations had already been made through opposition politician Mian Nawaz to move the court in the Memogate matter and a plethora of petitions was filed with the SC in the name of public interest and national security. Nawaz Sharif, who had drifted away from the military establishment over the years, was induced to do their dirty work once again presumably via a threat of establishment putting its weight behind Imran Khan—the new kid on the political block, who has chipped away on Sharif’s power base in Punjab.

The classic military nutcracker manoeuvre was applied via the NRO judgment and Memogate to squeeze the PPP. Unfortunately, the SC, contrary to its recent claims to have buried its ignoble past, obliged to serve as the pincer trapping the PPP. In both, the NRO and Memogate verdicts, the court has resorted to a lethal cocktail of Islamism, jingoism and national security rhetoric with fanfare going so far as to declare Gilani a liar and a dishonest man not just in temporal but the divine sense of the words.

At the time of writing this piece, the SC had ordered PM to appear in person and explain why he should not be charged with contempt of court. As the disqualification clauses of the Constitution stand, he has not committed contempt of court by defaming or ridiculing the judiciary (Article 63-1G) and is not guilty of any moral turpitude (literally meaning a criminal offence) for which he could be sentenced to at least two years in prison (Article 63-1F). So the SC has a limited option to nail him down on vaguely applied standards of morality, or some presumed violation of the sovereignty or national security.

However, the SC—whose own past conduct has been highly contemptuous of the rule of law, upholding the Constitution and recognising civilian supremacy—may find it extremely difficult to hold an elected Prime Minister with a parliamentary majority backing him in contempt. The Supreme Court and especially Chief Justice Chaudhry must not forget that the only institution and its members who have a role dirtier than the military establishment in destabilising civilian governments is the superior judiciary of Pakistan. They can hardly be the ones fit to cast the first stone.

Mohammad Taqi is a columnist for ‘Daily Times’, Pakistan. He can be reached at
mazdaki@me.com or via @mazdaki

Source: Tehelka

This is no longer about the finer points of the law, if it ever was that. It has turned into a full-blown political tamasha (spectacle) but not quite in the way the doom brigade had imagined. The Zardari dispensation has not collapsed; the PPP has not grovelled, an apology of any sort the last thing on its mind; and the doom pundits, predicting demise and downfall these past three years, have some more frustration to hang on to and live with.

At times not a week but even a day is a long time in politics. The crisis the government faces has not abated but with PM Yousaf Raza Gilani having appeared before the Supreme Court (SC) to answer the contempt summons served on him, and the mountains not having erupted or the heavens fallen, things don’t look quite as apocalyptic as they first did.

To the dismay of the new breed of lawyers who, to all appearances, can’t help themselves. While PPP representatives and their allies kept their cool many lawyers outside seemed to have lost it: shouting slogans against the government and in support of My Lord Chief Justice that were singularly out of place.

The lawyers’ movement did much good. It also encouraged the spread of bad manners (badtameezi) amongst the legal fraternity. What were the lawyers hoping for? That the PM should be summarily executed?

Love or hate Zardari, and we all know his past and his achievements in the realm of high finance, but hand it to him for standing his ground and not buckling under pressure. Judicial tension is enough of a headache. Add military pressure to it and the weight can be imagined. But both Zardari and Gilani have kept their nerve. If only they were half as good in governance and administration there would be some cause for cheer.

For Zardari this is not an unfamiliar role. For the way he faced his long years in prison no less a person than Majid Nizami, undisputed father of what we like to call the ideology of Pakistan, dubbed him Mard-e-Hur (man of freedom). But I think not many people were expecting Gilani to stand firm. As prime minister he has faced many charges but they stand redeemed by his stance in this crisis, the most serious to face his government.

Highest marks for fortitude also to Asfandyar Wali and the ANP. Not for a moment did they falter or lose sight of the democratic principle, that of parliamentary sovereignty, at stake in this politico-military-judicial crisis. It is possible to charge the ANP with many things, poor governance being one of them, but these pale when seen in the light of its present stand. Kudos also is due to the MQM, the JUI-F and the Q League for standing with the government and not being distracted by the signals emanating from Aabpara and General Headquarters.

By our standards and according to our political culture these are unusual happenings. The PPP alone at this juncture would have meant something else. But with its allies on its side this standoff acquires a different character, most (although not all) political forces on one side, non-political forces on the other.

This was evident even in the overwhelming support that came for the pro-democracy resolution in the National Assembly – meant more as a signal to relevant quarters than an affirmation of democracy. Poor administrators the present lot may be but there is no cavilling with their politics. I will even go so far as to say, and please don’t hit the roof, that Zardari while nowhere near Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s ability or many-sided talents is a far better politician than him. Bhutto had a knack for making enemies. Zardari has a knack for making friends and keeping them on his side.

So one thing is clear: this drama is not about to end any time soon. When it drags out what is anyone likely to gain? This is not about the rule of law, much as starry-eyed enthusiasts would like to see it that way. This is a power-play by other means, with some actors out in front and some behind the scenes. And it has got complicated because the PPP’s defiance, and the steadfastness of its allies, did not figure so much in the original script.

We have two cases here, the NRO case which led to the contempt charge against the PM, and the memo affair initiated by someone with a dubious reputation, Mansoor Ijaz, and picked up so enthusiastically, some would say with blind enthusiasm, by the country’s chief ideologue, ISI chief Lt Gen Shuja Pasha. The hype generated by the memo affair gave a fresh impetus to the NRO case, setting the stage for My Lord Justice Asif Khosa to wax lyrical about honesty and dishonesty.

In this atmosphere, its luridness heightened initially by Zardari’s departure for Dubai for medical treatment, it seemed only a matter of days before the curtains fell and the actors were made to leave the stage. But to prove once more that a week can be a long time in anything, the temperature has dropped a bit: the contempt charge turning into high-class political theatre and the memo affair, as it drags out in the SC-appointed commission, losing much of its dramatic appeal.

Mansoor Ijaz seemed to be laughing the most when the memo affair got going. After all, it is not every day that a publicity-seeking adventurer gets to take for a ride the entire national security establishment of the world’s only Islamic nuclear power, of which circumstance we never tire of reminding ourselves. Now as the memo affair seems less cut-and-dried than it first appeared, Husain Haqqani may be on the point of having the last laugh.

This should give rise to some relevant questions. If our vaunted knights of national security, our famous eyes-and-ears, can be fooled so comprehensively by a buccaneer such as Mansoor Ijaz, what right do we have to expect anything better of them in, say, the Abbottabad affair when we were caught – oh, the memory rankles – with our pants down?

Food for thought, food for introspection: the deadliest insult is not defeat which is part of life but ridicule. Osama bin Laden ridiculed us by living for more than five years in the shadow of PMA Kakul. The Americans ridiculed us by taking him out without our knights of national security knowing anything about it. And now Mansoor Ijaz has turned us into a global laughingstock by his funny piece of paper, or electronic mail, which alleges not that rape occurred but that rape was intended.

This must be a first in international jurisprudence, a high-level investigation into rape intended. Actual violations – of what, let us not say – such as Abbottabad or the Mehran Base attack leave us relatively unmoved. We take them in our stride and move on. But even if Mansoor Ijaz’s word is taken at face value, transgressions intended – that is, wholly in the realm of the imagination – and nowhere near even a mythical stage of implementation plunge us into turmoil. And chiefs of the army and ISI, with expressions of the utmost seriousness, hold that the issue at hand is grave and needs to be investigated. Allah be praised.

And the doom factories, never a shortage of them here, start working overtime to suggest conspiracy and national betrayal. The virtuous and not-so-virtuous wax indignant, calling down curses upon all things political, and judgments are written which are more a tribute to literature than anything to do with the law. Fantasy and make-believe take over and reality is pushed back…until a week passes and some measure of sanity returns.

Islamabad has no national theatre and no national orchestra. (It has a national library, appropriately enough well hidden from public view.) But what need of stage and orchestra when, in season and out, politics in all its manifestations does bold and sterling service for all the arts?

Email: winlust@yahoo.com

Source: The News

Constitutional experts in Pakistan as well as internationally have termed the execution of Pakistan’s first elected prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) illegal, a judicial murder which was clearly influenced by Pakistan army. On April 4, 1979, Bhutto was hanged after Punjabi judges of the Lahore High Court ordered his execution on charges under Section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The experts said several judges of the same bench had conceded that the conviction was awarded because of the Punjabi-dominated army’s pressure, and was against the law. Justice (r) Malik Saeed Hassan said various illegalities had been committed while giving the judgment. He said the then chief justice of the Lahore High Court, Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain, should not have been in the bench, as Bhutto objected his participation.

When ZAB appealed to the Supreme Court against the verdict of the LHC — a bench of nine judges, consisting of Justice Anwarul Haq, Justice Muhammad Akram, Justice Dorab Patel, Justice Abdul Haleem, Justice Nasim Hasan Shah, Justice Ghulam Safdar Shah, Justice Karam Elahi Chauhan, Justice Waheedudin Ahmad and Justice Qaisar Khan — was formed. During the hearing, Justice Qaisar Khan retired and Justice Waheedudin fell sick. The remaining seven judges heard the case and rejected the appeal in a four to three decision on February 2, 1979. Justice Ghulam Safdar Shah, Justice Abdul Halim and Justice Dorab Patel were the three dissenting judges, none of these belonged to Punjab. All four of the Punjabi judges in the Supreme Court review panel upheld the Punjabi Lahore High Court’s decision to sentence ZAB to death.

Pakistan’s current Punjabi Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s name should be added to the list of the judges who sentenced ZAB to death because of his ongoing obstructions in the way of the presidential reference to review the ZAB case decision. The ISI-backed Punjabi CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry sentences Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to death, once again, on 17 January 2012 by suspending the license of Babar Awan who was representing the federation with a request to review the ZAB decision.

CJ Chaudhry is not only insulting Pakistan’s constitution but also trying to kill democracy and Pakistan Peoples Party via ISI-inspired cases such as the NRO case and the Memo case.

List of Supreme Court Judges who killed Pakistan’s first elected Prime Minister

1. Chief Justice Anwarul Haq (1979)
2. Justice Nasim Hasan Shah (1979)
3. Justice Muhammad Akram (1979)
4. Justice Karam Elahi Chauhan (1979); and
5. Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry (2012)

17 January 2012: Supreme Court suspends Babar Awan’s license in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto reference case

The Supreme Court of Pakistan suspended the license of federation’s counsel Babar Awan temporarily in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) presidential reference case on Tuesday (17 Jan 2012). The Pakistan army-influenced court, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, ordered Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq to inform President Asif Ali Zardari that his counsel’s license has been suspended in the reference case, and the government should find a new lawyer.

During the hearing, Awan sought time from the court to find a new lawyer, but the court insisted on passing an interim order of cancelling his license.

The court has also sought the complete educational record of Awan.

The court said that the hearing of the ZAB reference case will be resumed when a new lawyer is appointed.

On December 1, after the Supreme Court ordered the formation of a commission to probe into the Memogate case, Awan addressed a press conference where he recited a Punjabi verse, which according to the ISI-backed Punjabi Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry represented ‘extremely derogatory’ language.

An ISI-backed Punjabi judge sentenced Pakistan’s first elected Prime Minister to death in a controversial decision which is today remembered as the judicial murder of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (Founder Chairman of PPP).

Another ISI-backed Punjabi judge is currently busy in derailing Pakistan’s elected government (of PPP and coalition) through ISI-inspired cases: the NRO case and the Memo case. The cancellation of license of ZAB reference case lawyer is not only an insult to Pakistan Peoples Party but is also a continuation of ZAB’s judicial murder.

Today’s decision is also a slap on the faces of the Third Jeem (journalists in Urdu and English media) who want to mislead and deceive Pakistani and international audience that no military coup is likely to take place in Pakistan. They are dutifully obfuscating facts while the First Jeem (Generals or Jenerals) is already enacting a silent coup via the Second Jeem (Judiciary). The Teen Jeem (3Js) are in action, once again!

——-

We are republishing our previous post on this topic: Pakistan’s Nazi Judiciary vs Babar Awan

We condemn the Pakistan army-backed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his tribe in the Supreme Court on their ongoing attacks on the elected government and its various ministers and officials. Supreme Court is currently hearing a reference filed by President Asif Zardari under Article 186 (advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court) of the Constitution seeking revisiting of the death sentence awarded to former prime minister and PPP founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1979. However, instead of providing relief to the party whose founder was judiciary murdered 32 years ago by Pakistan army, CJ Iftikhar and his judicial co-tribals are using the case to victimize and attack the aggrieved party.

What we are currently witnessing in Pakistan is the action replay of how Teen Jeem (Jenerals and their loyalist Judges and Journalists) act in close coordination to undermine and derail a democratic government.

In the latest development, the vice president of Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) senator Babar Awan was today (5 January 2012) issued second show cause notice in two days on contempt of court order by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

The court was hearing the Bhutto reference case on Thursday when Awan, who is federation’s lawyer in the case, was reprimanded after a video was played in the courtroom in which the PPP leader was seen commenting on the show cause notice issued by SC on Wednesday.

The video was recorded and misrepresented by one Jeem (journalists), shown to another Jeem (judges) and the order against the PPP’s VP was passed to appease the third jeem (jenerals). Arrangements were made on the court’s orders for footage and news clips of the remarks given by the former minister.

After watching the video (in which there was hardly anything objectionable said by Babar Awan, it was a tiny piece of Punjabi poetry), the court issued another show cause notice to the senator and senior PPP leader.

The chief justice asked Awan as to why he ridiculed the notices issued to PPP leaders and said: If you would not respect the state’s institutions, then who would? [Will the ISI-backed judges show similar respect to the country's elected president and prime minister that that they are expecting others to show to them?] Justice Iftikhar said that he was in favour of criticising the judiciary [Really? Then why this outrage against Awan?] but Awan’s comments were not criticism, adding that Awan was not issued a license to insult the apex court.

Justice Jawwad Khwaja said that Awan’s comment was not contempt of order but insult of judiciary. Justice Khwaja decided to quit the bench after viewing footage of the comments. He was quoted as saying that he would not forgive Awan even if 10 other judges on the bench would decide to pardon him.

In reply, Awan said that he did not intend to insult the judiciary rather he was appreciating the court and its order through Punjabi poetry. CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry warned Awan of cancelling his licence in view of his statement and asked him to bring his file having the details of his license in the next hearing. Awan has been directed to submit his reply by 9th January.

While we have in the past disagreed with certain statements and actions of Babar Awan (e.g., his objectionable statements about Ahmadi Muslims), such steps by the ISI-backed judiciary are in fact increasing PPP workers’ sympathies towards Awan.

As noted by Asad Munir on Twitter:

asadmunir38 Asad Munir
PPP real Jiyalas never had a great liking for Babar Awan but these contempt notices may change their opinion

It is pertinent to mention that the Supreme Court had issued show cause notices to Babar Awan and several other senior leaders of PPP over the December 1 press conference to against SC’s initial hearing on the ISI-made memo case. The other PPP leaders who were issued show cause notices on Wednesday include Federal information minister Firdous Ashiq Awan, Farooq Awan, Khursheed Shah and former federal mister for information and broadcasting Qamar Zaman Kaira.

Here is a copy of Babar Awan’s video shown in the court. Pakistan’s supreme court, it seems, is acting like a kangaroo court or a Nazi court which does not want to tolerate even a light sarcasm on its ISI-inspired political activism. Where is free speech, My Lord?

The writer is a former information secretary of the PPP and has been an MNA since 2002.

During the lawyers’ movement, 20 PPP workers sacrificed their lives when a bomb exploded on July 17, 2007, at an Islamabad reception being organised in honour of the deposed chief justice. This happened minutes before his arrival.

The restoration of the once-reinstated-then-deposed chief justice on March 16, 2009, was welcomed by all, particularly civil society and the media, and most people were of the view that it would usher the country into a new era of judicial independence and impartiality. One of the various challenges that the judiciary took upon itself after resuming office was to set the record straight about the actions of November 3, 2007, of then General Pervez Musharraf which were validated by the Supreme Court through its judgment in the Iqbal Tikka case. It was of critical importance that this judgment was nullified for a number of reasons including strengthening the Constitution but also for the reason that Justice Chaudhry had always remained the Chief Justice and was never deposed.

On another occasion the chief justice had stated that decisions like the one in the Tikka Iqbal case or the Maulvi Tameezuddin case came due to the judiciary’s own fault. These were published in various newspapers during the hearing of Sindh High Court Bar Association vs Federation of Pakistan case. This particular case was decided by the most revered Supreme Court on July 31, 2009. The impact of this judgment was twofold. Firstly, it removed 110 Honourable Judges of the superior courts but in effect also overturned the decision in the Iqbal Tikka case. Citing the principle of natural justice “no person shall be the judge in his own cause” some critiques have categorised this judgment as self-serving since the most respected chief justice was a beneficiary of this case. However, for people like me, it was a clear sign that my beloved Pakistan and democracy was free from all adventurists.

This decision also gave hope to the PPP which decided to seek redress regarding a grave error in the annals of history committed by the superior courts to appease and please former military ruler General Ziaul Haq, namely in the case of Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, sentenced to death in a fabricated case. If this was not enough to show miscarriage of justice, Mr Justice Nasim Hassan Shah who was a member of the bench of the Supreme Court that sentenced Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to death admitted in a TV talk show that the decision was made under duress from General Zia and accepted that the decision was essentially wrong.

In this regard, in April 2011, a presidential reference under Article 186 was filed to re-open the case to put right a historic wrong and thereby vindicate the position of the founding chairman of the PPP. This reference was sent on the understanding that principles are absolute. If the principle is to uphold law by which one wrong committed by the Supreme Court can be overturned (in the Iqbal Tikka case) then the same principle can be used for reviewing another wrong committed by the Supreme Court.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 16th, 2012.

کیا ان کو قومی غدار قرار دینے کا فیصلہ ہوچکا ہے؟

غیر جمہوری ریاستوں میں جو لوگ آ فاقی انسا نی حقوق، جمہوری آزادیوں، عوام کو اختیارات اور انصاف منتقل کرنےکی تحریکیں چلاتے ہیں اور نۓ جدیر نظام کی بشارت دیتے ہیں، ان کے نام ریاست غداری کا سرٹیفکیٹ جاری کردیتی ہے اور پھر اس باغی کو زہر کا پیالہ پینا ہوتا ہے، یا پھر تختہ دار پر پھانسی کے پھندے کو چومنا ہوتا ہے۔

سقراط سے زوالفقار بھٹو تک اور بے نظیر پھٹو کو سیکیورٹی رسک قرار دینے تک عدالت ریاست کی سب سے بڑی معاون رہی ہے۔ اور آج بھی ریاستی ادارے عدالت سے ہی فیصلہ صادر کروانا چاہتے ہیں کہ کون اہل کون نااہل اور کون غدار ہے۔ گزشتہ روز جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ کی سربراہی میں سپریم کورٹ کے پانچ رکنی بینچ نے متفقہ فیصلہ سُناتے ہوئے کہا کہ وزیر اعظم نے عدالتی احکامات پر عمل درآمد اور آئین کی پاسداری نہ کرکے اپنے حلف سے روگردانی کی ہے اور بادی النظر میں وہ ایماندار نہیں رہے اور اگر کوئی بھی شخص ایماندار اور امین نہ ہو تو وہ پارلیمنٹ کا رکن نہیں بن سکتا۔

عدالت کا کہنا تھا کہ وزیر اعظم نے آئین کی پاسداری پر اپنی سیاسی وابستگی کو ترجیح دی۔

عدالت کا یہ بھی کہنا تھا کہ صدر پاکستان اور وزیر قانون بھی بظاہر اپنے حلف سے روگردانی کے مرتکب ہوئے ہیں اور اُنہیں بھی ایسے ہی نتائج کا سامنا کرنا پڑ سکتا ہے۔

عدالت نے اپنے فیصلے میں کہا ہے کہ آئین کے ارٹیکل 189 کے تحت تمام ادارے سپریم کورٹ کے احکامات پر عمل درآمد کرنے کے پابند ہیں۔

پاکستان کا شمار ایسی ریاستوں میں ہوتا ہے جہاں اقتداراوراختیارات کا منبع فوج ہے۔ اور جو گزشتہ 64 سالوں سے دیگر ریاستی اداروں بیوکریسی، عدالت اور میڈیا کی معاونت سے نظام سلطنت چلارہی ہے۔

جب بھی میڈیا کی سول حکومت کی کرپشن مہم کے بعد فوج نے منتخب حکوت کوفارغ کیا تو قانونی جواز کا سرٹیفکیٹ عدالت نے ہی جاری کیا ہے۔

اس تناظر میں عدالت کے دو فرائص بن گۓ ہیں؛ شہری نما ئندوں کو ایمانداری یا غداری کا سر ٹیفکیٹ اور فوجی حکومتوں کو شب خون مارنے کے پعد قانونی جواز فراہم کرنا۔

کون اہل ہے یا نااہل اور کون ایماندار فیصلہ عوام نے کرنا ہے، کہ رہے ہیں پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کے نائب صدر ڈاکٹر بابر اعوان ، یہی جمہوری آفاقی اصول بھی ہے اورجدید ریاستوں کا دستور بھی۔

عاصمہ جہانگیر جو اپنے والد ملک جیلانی سے لے کر حسین حقانی تک انصاف کے لۓ عدالت کے دروازے پر کھڑی رہی ہیں؛ انہیں انصاف تو نہ مل سکا مگر آذاد عدلیہ کا بھرم ضرور کھل گیا۔ وہ واضع طور پر کہ رہی ہیں ’عدلیہ اپنے دائرہ کار سے تجاوز کرگئی ہے اوریہ بہت ہی خطرناک بات ہوگی کہ سپریم کورٹ اراکین پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات پر فیصلے دے۔‘

میاں نواز شریف کی حکومت جب جنرل پرویز مشرف نے غیر آئینی طور پر پرطرف کی اور انہیں جلاوطن ہونا پڑا تو انہوں نے لندن میں سہیل وڑائچ سے کتاب لکھوائ غدار کون؟ تو ا`س میں اپنی بیگناہی ثابت کرنے کے ساتھ ساتھ انہوں نے کارگل سے لے کر تمام اقدامات کا قصوروار عسکری اور انٹیلیجینس اداروں کو ٹھرایا، انہوں نے یہ تک لکہا کہ بی بی شہید اور آصف علی زرداری کے خلاف مقدمات انٹیلی جینیس ایجنسیوں کے کہنے پر بناے مگر سیاسی آزادی ملنے پر وہ یہ سب بھول چکے ہیں؛ وہ بھول چکے ہیں جب انہں فوجی آمر کے دور میں ھتکڑیاں لگائ گئیں، پنجرے میں لاد کر شہروں کا چکر لگایا جاتا تھا۔ آج جب ہمیں مزید سیاسی جمہوری آزادیوں کی طرف بڑھنا تھا، پی ایم ایل (ن) کے قائد کاغذ کا ایک ٹکڑا لے کر عدالت میں پہنچے ہیں، ا`ن کی انگلیاں شہری نمائندوں کی طرف ہیں اور وہ چلا چلا کر کہ رہی ہیں یہی ہیں غدار۔

پاکستان میں فوجی بالادستی کے تابع جو ریاستی نظام رہا ہے، ا`س کی ایک اہم خاصیت اختیارات، اقتدار اور وسائل کی مرکزیت رہی ہے۔ اس میں جس کسی نے بھی انسانی جمہوری وفاقی اصولوں کی بنیاد پر آفاقی حقوق اورصوبائ وسائل پر اختیارمانگا ہے ا`س کا نام غداروں فہرست میں ڈال دیا گیا ہے، پہلے ا`سکا میڈیا ٹرائل ہوا ہے اور پھر کورٹ میں۔ زیر نظر مضمون جو حسن مجتبیٰ نے لکھا اور بی بی سی اردو میں شائع ہوا ہے، میں قوم پرست غداروں کی ایک لمبی فہرست ہے۔

آج سازش ہورہی ہے کہ اس فہرست میںوفاق کے سربراہ عوام کے منتخب صدرآصف علی زرداری’ حکومتی سربراہ وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی اور امریکہ میں سابق پاکستانی سفیرحسین حقانی کا نام شامل کیا جاۓ ؛ ان کا جرم عوامی سیاسی اداروں کی بالادستی کا مطالبہ اور جمہوری عوامی حقوق کو فوقیت دینا ہے’ اس جرم کی بنا پر ان کی نہ صرف سیاسی بقا خطرے میں ہے بلکہ ذندگی بھی۔

حسن مجتبیٰ کا مکمل مضمون ذیل میں پیش خدمت ہے۔

غداری کے سرٹیفیکیٹ، ایک تاریخ
حسن مجتبیٰ
بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، نیو یارک

’اوہ جیہڑا جالب سی نہ! اوہ غدار سی غدار! قید ہوئیا چنگا ہوئیا‘ یہ وہ الفاظ تھے پاکستان کے عوامی شاعر حبیب جالب کے محلے والوں کے جو یہ اس وقت کہتے جب جالب گرفتار ہو کر جیل چلے جاتے۔ وہ حبیب جالب، آج جن کے شعر اگر پنجاب کے وزیر اعلیٰ شہباز شریف اور پاکستان کے صدر آصف علی زداری سمیت پاکستانی حکمران اپنے جلسوں میں نہ پڑھیں تو ان کی سیاسی روٹی ہضم نہیں ہوتی۔

پاکستان میں غداری کے القاب و سرٹیفیکیٹس بانٹے جانے کی تاریخ شاید پاکستان کی اپنی تاریخ سے بھی کہیں زیادہ پرانی ہے اور غداری کے ٹھپے بنانے کی فیکٹری کا سفر آج بھی جاری و ساری ہے۔

مضحکہ خیز بات یہ ہے کہ پاکستان میں ایسا بھی وقت آیا کہ جب تاج برطانیہ سے غداری کے الزامات تلے آنے والے اسی مٹی کی خمیر سے اٹھے ہوئے رہنما اور کارکن برصغیر میں انگریزوں سے نام نہاد آزادی حاصل کرنے کے بعد بھی پاکستان میں حکومتوں کی جانب سے بھی غدار ٹھہرائے گئے۔

اس کی ایک بڑی مثال خدائي خدمت گار اور ’سرحدی‘ گاندھی خان عبدالغفار خان باچا خان ہیں جنہیں آخر عمر تک اپنے اہل خانہ اور ساتھیوں سمیت غدار کہا جاتا رہا۔ پھر وہ غفار خان کے ساتھ ان کے بھائی ڈاکٹر خان صاحب تھے کہ بیٹے خان عبدالولی خان کہ ان کے پوتے اسفند یار ولی، اجمل خٹک کے زمانوں سے پہلے حاجی ترنگ زئي جیسے درویش (جن کے مزار پر کچھ عرصہ قبل طالبان نے قبضہ کیا تھا) یہ سب کے سب ایک یا دوسرے دور میں غدار ٹھہرائے جاتے رہے تھے۔

سابقہ مشرقی پاکستان میں حسین شہید سہروردی، مولانا عبد الحمید بھاشانی اور بنگلہ دیش کے بانی شیخ مجیب الرحمان کو غدار کہا گیا۔ اگرتلہ سازش کیس کے تحت ان پر غداری کا مقدمہ چلایا گیا اور دوسری بار انیس سو اکہتر میں ان پر خفیہ طور پر مقدمہ چلا کر انہیں سزائے موت دے دی گئی۔ ذوالفقار علی بھٹو نے برسرِ اقتدار آتے ہی شیخ مجیب الرحمان کی سزائے موت منسوخ کر دی تھی اور پھر اسی ’غدار‘ ٹھہرائے جانے والے شیخ مجیب الرحمان کے بنگلہ دیش کو نہ صرف تسلیم کیا گیا بلکہ اسلامی سربراہ کانفرنس میں شرکت کرنے کے لیے ان کی آمد کے موقع پر انہیں اکیس توپوں کی سلامی بھی دی گئی تھی۔

یہ بھی انسانی تاریخ میں شاذ و نادر ہی ہوا ہو کہ پوری کی پوری قوم اور فوج کا ایک بڑا حصہ بھی غدار کہلایا جائے۔انیس سو اکہتر میں پاکستان کی تاریخ میں اس روایت کی بھی داغ بیل ڈال دی گئی جب پورے کی پوری بنگالی قوم کو غدار کہا گیا اور پاکستانی فوج میں بنگالی فوجیوں کو بھی غدار۔
شاید لاہور کے پرانے لوگوں کو یاد ہو کہ اسی عاصمہ جہانگیر کے والد ملک جیلانی شیخ مجیب الرحمان کے پنجاب میں چند حامیوں اور دوستوں میں سے ایک تھے۔ وہ اکیلے ہی ان کی آزادی کے لیے بینر لیے مال روڈ پر کھڑے ہوا کرتے تھے۔
یہی عاصمہ جہانگير جو جوانی میں داخل ہوتے ہی اپنے ابا کو حبسِ بیجا میں رکھنے کے خلاف مقدمہ لڑتی رہی تھیں جسے پاکستان میں مشہور عاصمہ جیلانی کیس کہا جاتا ہے۔ اسی کیس میں ججوں نے جنرل یحییٰ کو فقط اس وقت غاصب کہا تھا جب وہ اقتدار میں نہیں رہے تھے۔
عبد الصمد خان اچکزئی پیر آف مانکی شریف، میاں افتخار الدین، فیض احمد فیض، مظہر علی خان، شيخ ایاز جیسے لوگ بھی مختلف دور میں حکومتوں اور ان کی کاسہ لیس میڈیا عرف قومی میڈیا کی طرف سےغدار قرار دیے جاتے رہے تھے۔

ایوب خان کے دور حکومت میں بلوچ رہنما نوروز خان اور اس کے بھائيوں اور بیٹوں کو پھانسی دے دی گئی تھی جبکہ عطاءاللہ خان مینگل ان کے بھائي نورالدین مینگل، غوث بخش بزنجو، خیر بخش مری، دود ا خان زرکزئي ، اور بلوچ قومی شاعر گل خان نصیر کو بھی غدار قرار دیا جاتا رہا جبکہ اکبر بگٹی کو سزائے موت سنائی گئی جو بعد میں معاف کردی گئی تھی۔

سندھی قوم پرست رہمنا جی ایم سید شاید غفار خان کے بعد اس ملک میں سب سے ’سینیئر غدار‘ تھے جنہیں اٹھائیس سال تک مختلف وقفوں سے تادم مرگ نظربند رکھا گیا اور ان کا انتقال بھی بینظیر بھٹو کی حکومت میں دوران نظر بندی میں ہوا تھا۔
بلکہ نظریہ ضرورت کی طرح غداری کے بھی سرٹیفیکیٹ حکومتیں، فوج اور میڈیا بانٹتے رہے۔

جنرل ضیاء کے آمرانہ دور حکومت میں غلام مصطفیٰ کھر اور جام صادق علی کو ’را کا ایجنٹ‘ بتایا گیا اور ان کے نام اٹک سازش کیس کے حوالے سے آئے۔ لیکن پھر اسی کھر اور جام صادق علی کی غداری کی سند پھاڑ کر انہیں بوقت ضرورت اعلیٰ عہدوں پر بھی بٹھایا گیا۔
غداروں کی فہرست میں ممتاز بھٹو، حفیظ پیرزادہ، الطاف حسین، مرتضیٰ بھٹو اور بینظیر بھٹو بھی بتائے جاتے رہے۔
تاریخ پلٹا کھاتی ہے اور پھر وہی حسین حقانی جو کہ اپنی اسی خالق اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے ہاتھوں سخت زیر عتاب آئے ہوئے ہیں اور غداری کے مقدمے کی تلوار پاکستانی اسٹیبلشمنٹ حب الوطنی کے کچے دھاگے میں باندھے ان کے سر پر لٹکائے رکھی ہوئی ہے۔ یہ ملک غداروں اور وعدہ معاف گواہوں کی فیکٹری ہے اور منتخب وزرائے اعظم کا مقتل گاہ ہے۔ پھر وہی عاصمہ اسی طرح ان کا مقدمہ لڑتی رہی ہے جس طرح وہ ملک جیلانی کا مقدمہ لڑتی رہی تھی کہ کردار وہی رہتے ہیں صرف غدار بدلتے رہتے ہیں۔

Pakistan's Supreme Court has been traditionally allied with the Punjabi-dominated military establishment against elected governments.

Make so much noise that everything becomes inaudible-then people would hear what we want them to hear. This is how the Pakistani Establishment is controlling the game at the moment – It is very clear who is who, and what is what. But because of a concentrated effort to remove the current Government and head of state, all the other noises and all other logic is being drowned.

Today the Supreme Court of Pakistan has given the Government six options to remedy the NRO decision. Yes you heard this right, Courts are now providing multiple answer type option to their decisions. I am not aware how this would work in future, would this be that decisions would be given to murders they have six choices, varying degrees of punishment and even a possible acquittal. We provide, you decide.

Court has stated following options:

Option 1: Court would move against the Prime Minister, President and Law Minister because they were ‘harping’ that they shall not write a letter to Switzerland, and this equates to violating the court’s order they have violated their oath to office and so are not worthy of the office. 

The Honourable Judge states that Prime Minister made these claims in the floor of the House and Senate. Honourable Judge has made many references to Quran, but perhaps has oversight over Article 69 of The Pakistan constitution that explicitly prohibits any scrutiny of statements made on the House floor. The said speech is non-justiciable in any court as it as it was made in the floor the house – How has there been such an oversight is amazing.

President made a similar statement in an interview with Hamid Mir – Be that may, Only way to remove a President is through Article 47 of the constitution, i.e. two-third majority of the Parliament.

Option 2: The Prime Minister and the Law Minister would be held to have made contempt of court, virtue of which both Gentleman could lose their membership of Parliament, and their office along with it.

Though again Article 63 (1) (g) (ridiculing Judiciary or Armed Forces) is mentioned, though again Article 69 defence should apply. Thus only 63 (1) (h) is applicable.

Option 3: Supreme Court would form a commission under Article 187 that shall execute the said relevant decision. 

Option 4: Immunity to President under Article 248 has NOT YET BEEN DISCUSSED  and if anyone seeks to discuss this in the court, they may do so. 

In any case, it is highly astonishing thus far that court has not heard anything under Article 248 presidential immunity, which one would have thought is a highly important defense available to the Government against writing the letter.

Option 5: NAB chairman has failed and protected the accused, namely Ahmed Riaz Sheikh, and Adnan Khawja who have been appointed wrongly and to take actions against Malik Qayoom.

Option 6: Court may ask the Parliament to take such steps as it sees fit to ensure that court’s judgement is implement  

It is not clear what court means about handing over the implementation to the Parliament. Does the court expect a resolution by the parliament would suffice, which would first form a commission to ensure implementation and the the said commission can advise parliament of way it has ensure implementation .