The hearing has been adjourned till Tuesday, June 19.
As the attorney general came on the rostrum to present his arguments, he criticised the lawyers and said that the use of poetry in the verdict of the contempt case against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani was denigrating.
He also said that the court was not “listening to his arguments”.
“The court can listen to the petitioners but does not give us the chance to say something.”
Irked by what he said, the chief justice warned the attorney general and told him to not give such a statement again. He also said that old matters should not be brought up in the court again.
The chief justice said that the PM contempt case had concluded and that the AG should remain relevant in his arguments.
AG Qadir asked the court to guide him as to what he should state in the court and he would not give any further arguments if the court had wanted so.
Justice Jawad S Khwaja observed that his arguments were being noted.
Earlier, the chief justice had said that a “convicted person is representing a population of 180 million people”.
The hearing was underway by a three-member bench of the Supreme Court including Chief Justice Chaudhry, Justice Khwaja and Justice Khilji Arif.
The chief justice had said, “A prime minister does not only represent a party, but is also a country’s representative.”
Gilani’s counsel, Aitzaz Ahsan, had presented his arguments before the judicial bench.
The chief justice had said that the steps taken by Speaker National Assembly Dr Fehmida Mirza regarding the function of the parliament can be reviewed.
Attorney General Qadir had submitted a reply before the judicial bench on behalf of Dr Mirza.
During his arguments, Ahsan had declared that the petitions could not be heard as the speaker had already given her statement on the issue.
The chief justice had said that the petitions maintained that Gilani was disqualified after the Supreme Court’s verdict in a contempt case against him was announced.
Ahsan had argued that the prime minister did not receive a sentence which disqualified him.
The Supreme Court had adjourned all other cases scheduled for today as it aimed to resolve this case as soon as possible.
In the previous hearing, Ahsan had proposed the formation of a larger bench, saying that the case was of high priority.
While presenting his case, Aitzaz had said that the Speaker’s office was not a ‘post office’, adding that she, too, has the right to use her own brain.
The petitions, including those filed by Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI), had challenged the speaker’s ruling and demanded prime minister’s disqualification after he was convicted of contempt by the apex court.
COMMENTS (48)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Time for independent elections. Lets see how these PPP "saints" perform in free and fair elections.
Once the dust settles and the euphoria dies down we'll know that we have created another Frankenstein. NO ONE including the judges can exceed the law. The current judiciary is creating its own laws. They are ridiculing the parliament and the choice of the people. They keep telling the nation that you are stupid and we are genius. If the CJ has powers under the constitution so does other institutions of the system such as the president, PM and the speaker. The parliament that makes the law is far superior to the judiciary which can only interpret the law. In this case the judiciary has gone beyond the constitution. Its a very sad decision
Convicted PM thrown out by PCO judge. seems like rival contest more then justice. . what about the actual case swiss accounts?
Today i can proudly say, I am pakistani! Supreme Court is the last hope for pakistani
It's quite clear that almost everyone who has an issue with the speaker's ruling are just those who don't like Gilani in general. There hasn't been a single mentioning of something that discredits her ruling, though. Further showing it's personal bias-based. I don't even care what the outcome is but that part is obvious to me. Railroad him all you like, though. It makes for entertaining dramatics.
why let him go at warninmg - no charge sheet reserved for whom?
Though the judgement of the 7 memebr bench was technically and fundamently correct, yet, the bench should have worded it correctly and conclusively, given the background of the parliament and the executive. Had it been in some other country, the same would have been an excellent example of judicial order. Still i salute the courage and conviction of the CJP
Why does the CJ seem to be giving the impression that he is extremely biased against a particular group of people and he becomes confrontational?
Well said, Sir. 200% true.
Teaching ethics to everyone on the face of earth, except own siblings?
To everyone who are speaking against the statement given by CJP: He has not given this statement to Press, the press has picked it out of the conversation the CJP have had with the lawyer as they speak about the case; The CJP has every right to say this in order to assess the answers from the representatives and beside that, they are not Rebots!
The Judges are independent of the State. The Genrals are indepndent of the State.
So. what is so strange that the Policians are independent of the State??
Why corruption of a politician becomes a hurdle for the State?
The vague statement by the CJ is conditioned on the concept of separation of powers. His job was done in the contempt proceedings by holding the PM in conviction. The courts are not allowed to fetter too much into the Parliamentary powers. The Parliament is the representative of the democracy and the actual power results in their hand. Unfortunately the PM has the support of the assembly, which is the supreme authority(over and above the judiciary) in a democracy. Challenging the PMs authority directly would have caused another debate in the sense of trying to derail democracy. The Judiciary cannot change the power system on its own, it can only act as a stimulus for change. And i believe the active judiciary is acting as a stimulus to change by weakening their vote gaining power.
The PPP usual response to any crisis : Crying like a baby.
""Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said on Monday that a “convicted person is representing a population of 180 million people,”"
I must say I agree with you CJ, but then again this is Pakistan we're talking about! Sadly people don't come into politics there to help the people but to help themselves by filling their pockets with the hard earned money of ordinary pakistanis
Sounds like statement by an opposition leader, and not CJP.
The President is immune to any persecution during the time he holds the chair. PM Gilani has done noting wrong by not sending the letter to Swiss authorities. The showman Game ship by the Chief Justice may be to ensnare even the army, by showcasing that even Political guys are not immune, like a chess game. So long it is non violent and army is also brought to task and under civilian control, the let the game play out
Tell me if i am wrong ..... but i think the CJ and his office should just interpret law and give its ruling. Its not his place to make statements that are outside his ambit and give emotional twist to things. Thats the politician's job :P
Hi ya all, can anyone explain the procedure prescribed in our constitution regarding impeachment of Chief Justice from his post. I mean is there any way to force removal of this controversial judge from the bench?
A convicted person is representing 180 million Pakistanis, says CJ: Sounds fair Iftikhar sb.
Salam to everyone. Best solution for PPP Govt is to hold elections immediatly under someother PM. Confrontation of institutions on any basis is harmful to Pakistan.
He was elected by the people he is representing, me lord. Don't you remember? I don't think you decide, according to the constitution, who represents the 180 million.
There seems to be overaction by the CJP. The Prime Minister alone targeted by the Supreme Court leaving the other cabinet ministers whereas all the policy matters are taken by combined cabinet. Whether this Chief Justice convict every Prime Minister if they refuse writing a letter to Swiss authorities as per the cabinet decisions. The Prime Minister can be removed only by the President if the former is personally involved in a serious criminal misconduct, or by impeachment by Parliament.
Respected SC: Please do not prolong this drama at your end and give some clear up decision. The Nation is no longer inclind to experience new drama everyday.
A PCO Judge is heading the judiciery. What's the difference?
What a pity a PCO judge is heading the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Soloution is to ask the people if Gillani is acceptable.
And the game continues.....
Have your cake and eat it too - the CJP is trying to shift focus from himself back to the PM and provoke a movement to oust him without actually taking blame for the dismissal. Petty politics.
I fully endorse the petitions filed by the (PML-N) and (PTI) challenging the Speakers ruling relating to disqualification of the prime minister after his conviction by the apex court, After publically making a staterment that he would fully honour the judgement of the Courts, should he be disqualified it is a matter of shame that Yousaf Raza Gilani is adamantly continuing to hang on to power. It is about time the Supreme Court of Pakistan comes up to the expectations of the nation and ensures that Justice is delivered. The entire Nation has no doubt on the credibility of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Justice Delayed is Justice denied. .
Does PCO Chief Justice not recognise the hollowness of his statement?
When a person who had sworn by Quran to obey Constitution can break it by taking an oath on the PCO and still remain the Chief Justice of Pakistan then the person who defies such a judge has full right to be the Prime Minister.
@Zulfiqar Baig: The judiciary is a party to this case - they cannot ever deliver justice.
Gilani's crime, if it is crime, is nothing as compared to the crime of taking oath twice under PCO and giving the right to a dictator to even amend the constitution.
SC could made it clear at the time of hearing the convicting PM that he is no more a PM due to convistion but every time a ball is thrown to others to decide and than again start from zero again, same old arguments will start again. this should end and SC should focus to put thing right within judicial system and that will surely put all things in right place
Like a PCO judge serving as Chief Justice.....when it comes to Pakistan not everything is perfect.
who knows who is on whose side - this is funny country.
If a PCO judge can still head the Judiciary, so whats wrong with convicted Prime Minister. You all are part of the same game. God bless Pakistan.
Excellent ruling... Convicted PM is our head of the Nation.... So why we complain to other when our so called LEADER is corrupt and CONVICTED...
If I could say one man who speaks for all Pakistanis, that would be CJ Iftikhar.
The gimmicks should end and judiciary should also be clear in its decisions. It leaves a lot of scope in the decisions to be tilted one way or the other. This leaves a scope for further business.
So now what ? Go Yousaf Go ..?
Any person whether he is elected representative if convicted even by a smallest court of the country stands 'Convicted'. Here, he has been convicted by the highest court of the country. He must leave his office as an example for coming generations, otherwise, our political-judicial system will never stabilize and anti-democratic forces will always use this to their advantage.
Does a convicted majority leader has a right to overthrow constitution.
Why did the Supreme court give a VAGUE verdict in the first place? Pakistan is already in dire straits and they are making it even worse by their unclear confusing verdicts.
Chief Justice comments are commendable.