Asghar Khan case: Federation files review petition against SC verdict
Deputy Attorney General Dil Muhammad Ali Zai said that the review petition has been filed, the stance of which was critical of the court's verdict against the president.
The Supreme Court’s detailed verdict on Asghar Khan’s petition had, among other things, also commented on the president’s role.
“The President of Pakistan is not supposed to indulge in politics as it has been established in the role of President Ghulam Ishaq Khan [during his tenure]… [he] has no authority to create an election cell or support, in any manner, a favoured candidate or political party, either by issuing directions to the armed forces or to civilians.”
The petition states that the Supreme Court should not have given any verdict related to the president.
Ali Zai said that although the petition was particularly against the Supreme Court's references with regards to the president, but it was also against the overall verdict.
The court's verdict had criticised the army, agencies and the president's office on the long drawn-out case.
COMMENTS (9)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732063440-0/elon-(3)1732063440-0-405x300.webp "article")
1732062434-0/elon-(2)1732062434-0-165x106.webp "article")
And then we blame the Army for taking out the diirty laundary when we have an entire political class unwilling to take responsibility for democracy. These corrupt politicians are the real threat to democracy, not the army or the judiciary.
@afzaalkhan: Agreed he should do it himself or parliament should do it not the courts
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks:Your contention in your reply and comment on ignorance to me is incorrect. Thank you.
@Muneer: The Supreme Court is interpreting the Constitution and you should take the time to read it too and then you won't be saying that why the SC is dictating the President this and that, your President is ignoring the constitution of Pakistan and so do you by not standing up for the law of land. Ignorance in Pakistan has no bounds.
Supreme Court has deviated from the actual case and has gone beyond the scope of the case without giving any opportunity to those who have been dragged into the case. In this case, from Mirza Aslam Baig, the court has involved army as an institution and would like to punish Kiyani for some thing that happed twenty two years back. Simillarly Asif Ali Zardari has been pointed out although he has no concern with the case. Every time when democracy was winded up, Politicians were blamed, but this time it will be winded because of the__-Mr arrogant.
The point is simple. Has the SC any right to give instructions to the President as what to do and what not to do?.Has any other SC in the world laid down any such limits?.Yes, the court could subject to law consider an act of the President after it has been done,whether it was as per the constitution or otherwise.But in that case also the court must hear the President before giving any decision.Laying down any limits on its own accord seems to be extra constititutional and over stepping.The review petition,in my view when considered in this context is correct.
Everything comes down to protecting this corrupt Zardari, no wonder people has such a contempt for the politicians, they are corrupt not only financially but also bankrupt morally, all they do is to look after themselves regardless of the consequences to the country. Come next elections, Zardari and his allies should be defeated to the extent that they can't come back for decades. When will the people of Pakistan ever stand up for their rights and speak up for excesses inflected upon them by this government and it's corrupt allies.
Unfortunately, we cannot see beyond our nose. Self interest is over and above the national interest, everywhere.
This is the reason army intervenes, political leadership refuses time and again to take responsibility and charge of affairs. It won't be end of world if President Zardari realize that for betterment of country he should be neutral and if he can't resign and make someone else president. Even if we go by that he is needed challenging whole verdict is ridiculous. After this challenge don't come back and bash army or judiciary. Unless political class is ready to take charge, army or judiciary will have to fill the gap.