Zardari’s lawyers stage walkout from LHC
LAHORE:
A four-member panel of President Asif Zardari’s advocates created a stir in the Lahore High Court on Monday. The four walked out of the court in protest after a full bench dismissed their application challenging the maintainability of the petition against the holding of dual offices by the president.
The panel comprising advocates Talib H. Rizvi, S.M. Masood, Ramazan Chaudhry and Saiful Mulook asked the court to let them argue the maintainability of the petition against the president. Their point of view was that the court should decide their application and then hear the main petitions filed by the Pakistan Lawyers Forum, Engineer Ghulam Jilani and Asif Mahmood Khan.
But the advocate for one of the petitioners A.K. Dogar disagreed with this interpretation of the law. He said the fact that he had started his arguments meant the petition had been admitted for regular hearing. As such, contended Dogar, there was no point in discussing its maintainability.
At this, the bench headed by Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry dismissed the application of president’s counsels and asked AK Dogar to resume his arguments. And Rizvi’s request to allow the president’s counsels to file an appeal against the dismissal of their application and stay proceedings was also shot down by the court. At this, the four staged a walkout.
Outside the courtroom, the lawyers said they would not appear before a court which was “partial”. Masood also contended that the high courts lacked jurisdiction to hear matters pertaining to the federation and the president.
Inside, Dogar told the five-member bench that Zardari was no longer the president as he had not resigned from the office of PPP co-chairmanship after taking oath as president. Dogar also filed newspaper clippings to prove that the Presidency was functioning as the PPP headquarters.
Dogar cited various judgements of the Supreme Court stating the president should be apolitical. He quoted from the Muhammad Nawaz Sharif vs President of Pakistan judgement, which said: “Now, the president as the symbol of the unity of the federation is entitled to the highest respect and esteem by all the functionaries of the state.
But it is equally true that this respect and esteem will be forthcoming if he conducts himself with utmost impartiality and neutrality, he keeps himself entirely aloof from party politics and does not give the impression to any one that he is siding with one faction or working against the other.”
Dogar also brought up the government’s non-implementation of the Supreme Court’s National Reconciliation verdict, among others. “By not writing to the Swiss authorities for the reopening of Swiss cases and by not appointing Tariq Khosa for investigating the Bank of Punjab scam, the government is committing contempt of court and also high treason by misusing its powers for personal gains,” he accused.
Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry snubbed the lawyer then, saying both matters were before the Supreme Court which would resolve the issue. Before adjourning the case, the court issued a notice to the attorney general of Pakistan to appear on July 7 to assist the court.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 22nd, 2010.
A four-member panel of President Asif Zardari’s advocates created a stir in the Lahore High Court on Monday. The four walked out of the court in protest after a full bench dismissed their application challenging the maintainability of the petition against the holding of dual offices by the president.
The panel comprising advocates Talib H. Rizvi, S.M. Masood, Ramazan Chaudhry and Saiful Mulook asked the court to let them argue the maintainability of the petition against the president. Their point of view was that the court should decide their application and then hear the main petitions filed by the Pakistan Lawyers Forum, Engineer Ghulam Jilani and Asif Mahmood Khan.
But the advocate for one of the petitioners A.K. Dogar disagreed with this interpretation of the law. He said the fact that he had started his arguments meant the petition had been admitted for regular hearing. As such, contended Dogar, there was no point in discussing its maintainability.
At this, the bench headed by Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry dismissed the application of president’s counsels and asked AK Dogar to resume his arguments. And Rizvi’s request to allow the president’s counsels to file an appeal against the dismissal of their application and stay proceedings was also shot down by the court. At this, the four staged a walkout.
Outside the courtroom, the lawyers said they would not appear before a court which was “partial”. Masood also contended that the high courts lacked jurisdiction to hear matters pertaining to the federation and the president.
Inside, Dogar told the five-member bench that Zardari was no longer the president as he had not resigned from the office of PPP co-chairmanship after taking oath as president. Dogar also filed newspaper clippings to prove that the Presidency was functioning as the PPP headquarters.
Dogar cited various judgements of the Supreme Court stating the president should be apolitical. He quoted from the Muhammad Nawaz Sharif vs President of Pakistan judgement, which said: “Now, the president as the symbol of the unity of the federation is entitled to the highest respect and esteem by all the functionaries of the state.
But it is equally true that this respect and esteem will be forthcoming if he conducts himself with utmost impartiality and neutrality, he keeps himself entirely aloof from party politics and does not give the impression to any one that he is siding with one faction or working against the other.”
Dogar also brought up the government’s non-implementation of the Supreme Court’s National Reconciliation verdict, among others. “By not writing to the Swiss authorities for the reopening of Swiss cases and by not appointing Tariq Khosa for investigating the Bank of Punjab scam, the government is committing contempt of court and also high treason by misusing its powers for personal gains,” he accused.
Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry snubbed the lawyer then, saying both matters were before the Supreme Court which would resolve the issue. Before adjourning the case, the court issued a notice to the attorney general of Pakistan to appear on July 7 to assist the court.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 22nd, 2010.