What A Strategy?

Prime Minister Gilani reiterated his commitment to implement the detailed judgment of the Supreme Court on the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) except for the part pertaining to the reopening of the Swiss cases owing to constitutional immunity enjoyed by the president.

It seems as if there is a new game plan of the PPP strategists to counter the problems posed subsequent to the repeal of the said illegitimate ordinance.

As expected, President Zardari returned CJ’s proposal for Supreme Court Slot--back to Mr. Justice Chaudhry requesting to recommend Justice Khawaja instead. It appears that the PPP government wants to remove Justice Khawaja from LHC, so that his recommended names are replaced favouring the PPP jialaas under Justice Saqib Nisar.

Many weeks ago, Chief Justice Punjab Khawaja Muhammad Sharif recommended 26 names to fill the vacancies of Lahore High Court, but Governor Taseer never took any appropriate action as required under the Constitution.

Former CJP Justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, Justice (retd) Wajihuddin Ahmad, Akram Sheikh Advocate and even the petitioner of the Al Jihad Trust case Wahabul Khairi Advocate, are of the opinion that it is the “CJP’s discretion” to promote any judge of the high court. They say that it is not necessary to appoint the senior-most judge of a high court as a Supreme Court judge. They have agreed that the CJP’s recommendations are in line with the Constitution.

Most importantly, Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif enjoys excellent working and personal relations with Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Justice Chaudhry respects Khawaja Sharif a lot for his courage and he is very much satisfied with his performance also. He thinks that Justice Khawaja is running the LHC affairs very well despite the shortage of 40 judges and that is why he wants Justice Khawaja to continue as the LHC chief justice.

Now, does it make sense to replace such an efficient Justice Khawaja with  Justice Saqib Nisar who is retiring in less than three months time?

Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry specifically mentioned in his summary that he was recommending the name of Justice Saqib Nisar's elevation to SC with the consent of Justice Khawaja Sharif. The question is---If Justice Khawaja Sharif has no objection, who is Mr Zardari to object ?

In the recent past, Pres Zardari appointed five junior judges out of (sitting judges and retired judges) to the Supreme Court, because the CJP recommended them based on rule of fitness and suitability. Zardari and Gilani did not have any objection then.

Recently, a reference has been moved by Maulvi Iqbal Haider under Articles 63(2) and 41(3) of the Constitution requesting the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) to re-scrutinise the candidates of the presidential elections due to the fact that the NRO was “conditionally operational” at the time. Because at that time, the nomination papers had been accepted subject to final decision of the Supreme Court on petitions challenging the NRO.

Since Zardari's presidency and immunity are the by-products of NRO; hence no justification  for the President to continue any longer after the demise of  black law.

Thank God, Pakistan is lucky to have one last chance in the form of present Judicial System under the leadership of Justice Chaudhry. Therefore, anyone daring to disrupt/derail the overhauled system is likely to end up looking for an 'Exit-Strategy' --sooner the better --instead of facing the blind law.

It is rightly said, “No force on earth can destabilize a country where judicial system is intact.”

It is safely concluded rather strongly recommended that all disputed personalities including the accused President should be brave enough to step down immediately and face trials to let the legal process go smoothly, because that is in the best interest of Pakistan.

Merit Or Vested Interests

Disputing with the meaning of the word ‘Merit’ is unimaginable unless some one is ignorant or illiterate. But, Zardari has designed his own perception of the word which lead him to disagree totally with what ‘merit’ really means in judicial and constitutional language.

How an ‘under-qualified’ man of ‘ill-repute’ dares collide with the highly admirable “Head of Judiciary” still remains to be seen in the coming weeks. The embattled billionaire President does not even realize the ‘judicial discretion’ enjoyed by the CJP in discharging judicial functions and recommendations. Hence, the accused President has chosen a wrong path of “head on collision” instead. How pathetic? Under the Constitution, however, the President has to accept the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but sadly enough, the leadership is hell bent upon playing a dirty game of meddling with the decent judicial process just to safe guard the vested interests. “Nothing so completely baffles one who is full of trick and duplicity himself, than straightforward and simple integrity in another.” As Mr.President lacks integrity, hence cannot be trusted.

Technical knowledge, efficient delivery, honesty, hard work, transparent past & present track record and good moral character are the main foundation of one’s integrity. Since, Zardari & company have lost their unlawful COVER due to the sad demise of their beloved NRO, thus, the whole accused gang of wrong doers, is in deep trouble to self defend.

Out of desperation, a preemptive strike in the form of 'a slowdown or a showdown' has been launched for the sake of vested interests. Now Pres Zardari is fully focused on ‘merit appointments’ as mis-perceived by him. A conspiracy to divide judges has already failed as the approached judges are standing with CJP under all circumstances.

In deed, President Sahib is committing a constitutional wrong by delaying and hindering the desperately needed new hiring of superior judges. The Judiciary wants to eliminate corruption but the government wants to destroy the Supreme Court.

Now, the fundamental focus of patriotic Pakistanis ought to be the protection of the "state institutions’ integrity, and not the protection of individuals at the expense of institutions."

The Supreme Court has already clarified categorically that recommendations of the SC chief justice are binding on the President and any deviation would be tantamount to “a subversion of the constitution.” According to legal experts, the SC verdicts are binding under articles 189 and 190. Under Article 189, the SC verdicts are supreme over the administrative decisions and article 190 says that all the state organs must help Supreme Court and implement the apex court decisions.

Registrar Apex court Dr Faqir Hussain told, “The constitution clearly states that appointment in Supreme Court is made by the president after consultation with the chief justice of Pakistan. The word consultation has been interpreted in the judges-appointment case of 1996. It is clearly laid down in this judgment that consultation has to be purposive, meaningful and that ordinarily the recommendations of the chief justice of Pakistan have primacy and binding on the executive.”

According to the Registrar,“Chief justice is better placed to know the qualifications, calibre and professional standing of a candidate for the position of the judge in Supreme Court. Therefore, his recommendation ordinarily is binding on the president and will have to be accepted, will have to be approved except for sound and valid reasons to be communicated to the chief justice, which is justifiable. These reasons are open to scrutiny to the court of law and court can give judgment on validity of the reasons given by the president. Therefore, far all practical purposes, the recommendations are binding on the president. Any deviation from it would be contravention of the constitution and subversion of the constitution.”

According to ex CJP Justice Saeed uz Zaman Siddiqui, the President could differ with the recommendations sent by the chief justice of Pakistan regarding appointment of some judges in the apex court by giving valid reasons which could later be examined by the Chief Justice. “But under the law and the constitution, neither the president nor the prime minister or any other executive authority has any power to recommend any new name, because a name could only be recommended by the chief justice for the appointment in Supreme Court.”

It is suggested that the government and the President must stop tampering with the recommendations of CJP and let the judicial process proceed on its constitutional course in the best interest of the country, and be prepared to face legal cases pending adjudication.

A balanced success can only be built on honesty, character, integrity, faith, love and loyalty.

But, if the leadership lacks the said qualities, then there is a sufficient ground for a change.

The writer is an independent analyst based in Canada.

Campaigning for peace, a paradigm shift

Having been disappointed by the Indian government’s lack of interest to restart a composite dialogue process with Pakistan---simply on the pretext of Mumbai incidence, the Jang Group and Times of India Group have jointly begun a campaign to repair the broken bonds between the two nations with a brand new approach.

 Indeed, “peace cannot be achieved through violence; it can only be attained through understanding.” Since both Newspaper-groups have realized the hopeless development at the government level, there is an absolute need for plannig an honest and aggressive approach to deal with the core and non-core issues such as Kashmir dispute, the water dispute, terrorism and all other obstacles to peace.

A paradigm is not a theory; it is the entire construct of assumptions, beliefs, and experiences that define the subject matter for theory. In the present scenario, there is a great deal of need to encourage ‘a paradigm shift’ in the way people think about development for refining the mutual relationship, and in how people support sustainable change.

Quite certainly, our support will go a long way to build networks and trust between social, cultural, political, economic and geographic hemispheres to advance education and material information on important issues relating to religious practices, poverty, ecology, health, agriculture, and trade relations etc. to bring about a positive change for the mutual benefit of India and Pakistan.

'A paradigm shift' is-therefore, a completely new direction for the people of both countries for overturning all previous negative assumptions about how the things work, what is possible, and what the implications of the future are.

In other words, it may be defined as “Attitude-Revolution.” It has to be embraced because it is the process of becoming better and more effective than we are, and better than we could ever be standing still.

Despite the UN resolutions to give the right of plebiscite to Kashmiris to decide their own fate, Indian government has always been defiant, therefore, Kashmir, being a disputed territory, still remains the root cause of all other problems.
Peace is a two way street of conflict and compromise. A joint venture project “Aman Ki Asha” launched by the Jang Group and the Times of India is highly praise-worthy because it provides a formula for the resolution of the long-standing Kashmir conflict.

The two media groups have conveyed the message that it is time to do away with tension and promote friendship to narrow down the gap between  two nations, Bharat and Pakistan. Both nations are indeed obligated to help promote peace and tranquility under the new strategy.

The writer is an independent analyst based in Canada.

Re: “AMAN KI ASHA” The News International-(Jang Group) Pakistan BLOG