New contempt law: SC forms larger bench, to hear cases on July 23

abolish this discriminatory law

Recommend

Correct Law Minister name, Law Minister Moula Baksh Chandio is former minister now law minister is Farooq H Naik

Recommend

The Combo candidate displaying the photo of CJ on the election banner failed to win in the by-pole election, against the young Glani. so the PCO SC indirectly helping in a way by taking up cases again & again against the democrat Govt. of PPP.

Recommend

@Anoni:
instead, CJ thinks’ He is Supreme . . . ???

Recommend

Noora Khusti continues.

Recommend

I wonder how often we waste / lose our hard earned money, respect, position, honor and we dont chaned ourselves gernation after gernations, age and experience does not change or effect our attitude.
How we the society members are immune to these things when it works universally? Why? any one to reply please?

Recommend

Welcome to the new episode of a soap opera. Few notices will be filed, few threats will be issued, few extra newspaper will be sold. At the end poor tax payer will be still waiting for his case heard as the judges will be busy with petion of one sort or the other.
President Zardari should expand SCP with additional 13 judges who exclusively hear constitutional cases and suo motto etc and spare few judges to hear cases of joe average Pakistani.

Recommend

The members of the parliament and government are unable to perform their duties if a sword of contempt law keeps hanging over their heads..The way supreme court has been using contempt laws has basically replaced the whole constitution,Even Nawaz shareef is now worries
a CPU try can not be run by any government if a supreme court is trying to hound,harass
And undermine all their efforts to run the country
Nowhere in the world is a court yielding so much power as in Pakistan Alll intellectuals in media are criticising CJ for overstepping it’s mark If this new law of struck down then virtually judiciary has taken over the powers of parilament Common sense should prevail

Recommend

@Logic Europe: Please look at the court setup in any successful country and you’ll find a system of checks and balances in place. Now that the SC is imposing these checks on the parliament we’re finally getting to a strong democratic setup. Beside, this law is certainly frivolous and had the parliament been intellectually far-sighted and honest they would have understood its impact on Pakistan’s future.

P.S. May common sense also prevail in the heads of the ruling parties as well.

Recommend

The PCO SC judges have nothing better to do except hot to the political cases. There are no other cases of any public importance in Pakistani courts. Paid govt servants who have taken oath to follow the constitution should be arrested and put away when political candidates use their presence, decisions, pictures and support during elections. The current CJ is the most political and controversial man in the history.Recommend

Also dear Mirza,

You are quite lonely in describing the SC as PCO Judges. This is the real SC that has come into place against the best attempts of the “NRO” government and has replaced the comical “Dogar Court”.Recommend

@Its (still) the EconomyStupid:
Sir/Madam, what is your definition of most civilized countries? In the US the healthcare law has been approved. It was challenged in “lower courts” and gradually appealed in higher to finally the SC. The SC decided with 5:4 that it is constitutional and went with the Obama administration. This is the normal way and each challenger and defendant has a right of appeal to a higher court. Not like cases are starting and ending under the PCO SC. I have given a most recent example of the oldest democracy in the world. I am sure the same thing happens in India as well. The SC does not go ahead and take up the cases of even highest imp by itself. The bill in question was approved only due to the suo motu and agressive attitutde of the SC judges in taking up only political cases against the ruling coalition.
Regards,
MirzaRecommend

Mirza,

US is a relatively new country in historical terms and therefore also a relatively new democracy. UK is the old democracy and thats the constitutional model closest to us. So quote examples from there, if and when you have to.

Under the Pakistani constitution, constitutional issues are reserved only for the Supreme court to interpret and decide, so the US analogy is anyway and totally inapplicable.

Checking abuse of authority by the ruling executive is a key function of any judiciary – calling such judicial action as “political cases” is tantamount to confusing the issue. They are not political cases; rather they are “cases against ruling politicians” – big difference

A more reasonable objection would be that the SC should also focus on cases against army and PML-N; but then the PPP didn’t win any favours by trying its best to avoid restoration of the true SC and instead trying its best to continue a Dogar Court.

Suo moto and proactive approach against executive authority abuse can’t justify malafide and black laws so such a black-bill will be deservedly struck down. Supreme Court intervention against abuse of executive authority is there only because we don’t have a constitutionally empowered independent NAB like that of the UK, which can fearlessly hunt down reigning executives. Again, the PPP and their likes are not interested in passing such a golden law, so the Supreme Court is the only remaining Pakistani institution who has the constitutional ability and intrinsic will to fill up this vaccum and check the corruption that an IMF-sponsored i.e. insolvent Pakistan can’t afford.

The Supreme Court has made some mistakes and continues to make some more but the larger direction is in the interest of Pakistan and I believe things will settle down once a new CJ comes in. So your comments miss the larger picture. The PPP’s insistence on not restoring this judiciary was totally selfish and totally against the interest of Pakistan.

There is no point responding to present allegations with past history, which is the style of the PPP and reflects contempt for the intelligence of the Pakistani voter. Outstanding or present cases can only be decided on “relevant” merit.

Trust this suffices and clarifies. Lets be balanced.

Recommend

Contempt of Court would never have been an issue if the Court has gained respect, instead of demanding respect.

Recommend

@Logic Europe:

You have not really explained why my comments “most flimsy”. I never said the judiciary has exceed its limits; rather I said it has made some mistakes. So please refer to my relevant post again. In this regard, also note that one of the greatest American jurists once popularly said: the Supreme Court is not final because its infallable; rather its infallable because its final. So the Supreme Court’s mistakes are never (including the USA) a sufficient cause for defiance of its orders.

Secondly, I also never said that the Supreme Court is “attacking politicians”; rather I said that it is proactively “checking abuse by ruling politicians i.e. abuse of executive authority”. Exercising such checks falls within the Supreme Courts constitutional authority. So please refer to my relevant post again.

As for your US analogy in the end of your post, its firstly misplaced as I have already explained in my previous post that the US legal system has no relevance to Pakistan thats based on the British legal system. Secondly, your analogy is also inaccurate because in the US, a Supreme Court judge, once appointed, cannot be removed – in fact there is not even a retirement age for US Supreme Court judges and they even retire according to their own discretion!

Finally, I note that your post is silent on my statements against the PPP.

I trust this suffices.

Recommend

@syed Ali .in the scenario created by you ,it is the people who will take action either by voting the government out in elections when due or by common rebellion .This happened when masses rose against Bhutoo government and atul khan .Also the people have voted PPP and PMLN out and in many times. So judiciary has no role in running the day to day affairs of a country As you see ,judiciary has virtually taken over the running of government ..Thisnis not their job. MAY I REMIND YOU THAT SWISS BANK CASE IS STILL BEING PERSUED .ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOVED IN CORRUPTION WILL BE CAUGHTBEVENTUALLY ..THE CASES AGAINST PPP LEADERS INDICATE THAT SYSTEM IS WORKING. IT IS NOT WORKING AGAINST SHAREEFS CORRUPTION AS THE CHIEF JUSTICES OWS THEM A DEBT OF GRATITUDE

Recommend

Logic Europe,

You are taken by the deliberate myst created by PPP’s narrative i.e. electoral accountability can or somehow be a substitue for legal accountability. Please understand that electoral accountability is no substitute for legal accountability. In other words, just because a government is elected, it does not possess license to break the law during its tenure. If allowed, such practice too would be a violation of the constitution that the courts are under oath to preserve, enforce and defend. A government can rule only according to the law and, if found breaking the law, its the constitutional duty of the judiciary to punish the wrong-doer just like they would punish any Tom, Dick or Harry. So this is the fundamental flaw in your understanding.

For the same reason, your response to my hypothetical US situation is also totally wrong. The US law enforcement and Justice system would never wait for electoral accountability. They would swiftly move to enforce the law! Indeed, so sure are the rulers of those countries of such reaction by the law enforcement and justice system that they resign the moment even the most minor charge of violation is brought against them i.e. they dont wait until the charge is proven against them in a court of law.

Trust this suffices.

Recommend

@ syed Ali
it is immaterial what country you consider in your arguments
the simple truth is that judiciary is perceived to be biased by a vast majority of people
by its behavior it is targeting a particular political party by perverting the course of justice by frequent suo motos. In America targeting of a particular party will be totally unacceptable
and what law is being enforced by these courts? twent year old case , if the government has broken any laws then those cases should be tried .instead membership of Rahman Malik and other flimsy issues are being considered by the courts at the cast of its normal business
a few case of corruption have been pointed out by the courts and in all government systems it is not unusual to find people who do corruption.
I will say the will of the people is supreme and they make the constitution and they can change the constitution JUDGES WILL HAVE TO BE APLOITICAL ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE ACCUSED OF CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY

Recommend