This particular case is still in the court.court has not decided the issue.lets wait and see.

I do repsrect your views as you are truly interpreting the emotions of the nation but as I did request in my last post that we have to look into the matter with more optimistism and wise approach.

I admit that we had a bad past, I confess all of our failures that we always did harm the political institute in last 62 years, sometimes chosing economy as first priority instead of strengthing the political institue and sometimes with provisin of support to Military intervention in Power corridor.

We have to start a new journey, a way towards mature, transparant and strong democratic system.

If you look into the presented problems with keen interest, you must come to the point that the base reason was "Dependant Judiciary" who was highjacked by Military dictators several times in our history.

The Hon'ble CJP was the part of highjacked SC in 1999 but he stood against the same dictator later as you know much better than me regarding the said topic.

We lost Z A Bhutto and many democratic governments just because of the highjacked judiciary and military dictatorship. Why ??? Coz who raised against the bug was eliminated with any suitable mean.

We should not repeat the mistake now, Hon'ble CJP came back to the office with a long struggle, even with the support of Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto when she was alive.

This is just matter of interpretation of the constitution which will be explained by Supreme Court of Pakistan as the only authority to enterprete the constitution rightly.

We should have respect for Hon'ble CJP and Hon'ble President as both are Federation symbals and courage to absorb these sort of misunderstandings in interpretation of constitution.

We have a consensus that we need a transparant and strong political system which is in developing phase.

Every institute of the country in in developing phase proceeding towards maturity so these types of thought-clashes would definitely be there.

We should not comment on the current scenario with aggression to any side (CJP or President) as country needs more wise and creative approach to pass on this phase.

Z A Bhutto was also a part of Military Government before his resignation after Tashkent Agreement so in my opinion he cannot be blamed for his participation of past in anti-democratic government.

Same case with Hon'ble CJP is here in Pakistan and I strongly comment that we should not blame him for his past involvement in Military intervention.

I do apologise if I used any harsh words to illustrate my point of view coz it s strictly professional and constructive criticism on your comments.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him

@ shallowwater

(senior most judge must go to the supreme court.)it iz not mention in the constitution of Pakistan.And an elected govt must perform thier functions with in the limits of fundamental law of state(constitution).The duty of interpretation of constitution lies with supreme court.

Article 177 and 193 of 1973 constitution provides that the president of pakistan shall appoint the judges of supreme after consultation of chief justice of Pakistan and shall appoint the judges of high court after the consultation of chief justice of Pakistan with governor of the province concerned and the chief justice of the high court concerned.

In 1996 supreme court already interpreted the word consultation in Article 177 & 193(in judges case)

Supreme court observed that cosultation must be effective,meaningful and consesus oriented allowing the consultee the power to reject the nomination.

The appointment of judges of the superior courts must be made in accordance with the consultation of the Chief justice because they are the best to judge the fitness and suitability of judge.

Unfortunately this argument does not hold much water. It is nowhere asserted that the CJP's advice is binding upon Mr. President.


Article: 177 Appointment of Supreme Court Judges

177. Appointment of Supreme Court Judges.-(1) The Chief Justice of Pakistan shall be appointed by the President, and each of the other Judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice.

(2) A person shall not be appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court unless he is a citizen of Pakistan and-

(a) has for a period of, or for periods aggregating, not less than five years been a Judge of a High Court (Including a High Court which existed in Pakistan at any time before the commencing day); or

(b) has for a period of, or for periods aggregating not less than fifteen years been an advocate of a High Court (including a High Court which existed in Pakistan at any time before the commencing day.)

Emotions and personal opinions aside but can you tell how the Presidency has violated this article of the constitution ?

regards,
floydian

__________________
Police Service of Pakistan (PSP)
39th Common Training Program

This is judicial coup de ite. Judiciary has thought to take share in this orphan state. Military dictatorship, democratic dictatorship, and now judicial dictatorship is in vogue. When army can rule this state then why can not Judiciary. Some body has taught CJ Iftikhar to take his share from this orphan state whose resources are swalloed by all others then why can't CJ take his share from it. Banto, taqseem karo aor khao.

With due respect, just for the sake of comment, I do want to argue your statement.

At first, we should settle the question of the most importance for the day i.e. "Who will interprete the constitution???" as I did post the query in one of my previous replies.

I think you will develop a consensus with me in answer of this query that "Supreme Court is the authority to interprete the constitution truely."

Now coming precisely to the point you did rise in your kind post " Can you tell how the Presidency has violated this article of the constitution ?"

Supreme Court of Pakistan has interpreted the said article (Article 177) as follows:

"Article 177 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan provides that a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of Pakistan. The Additional Registrar stated that according to the record of this Court no consultation had taken place by the President with the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan regarding the appointment of Mr. Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court. In the light of the statement of Additional Registrar and also the note submitted by him and placed on the file of Constitution Petitions No.2,3 and 4 of 2010 relating to the same/almost the same matter, already pending before this Court in which notices had been issued and a larger Bench constituted for 18-2-2010, the notification of the appointment of Mr. Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif as a Judge of the Supreme Court, prima facie, appears to have been issued in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly, Article 177, hence the same is suspended subject to notice to the Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Division, the Attorney General for Pakistan and the learned Advocate General Punjab. Mr. Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif shall continue to perform his duties as Chief
Justice of the Lahore High Court until further orders of this Court. No steps to administer oath to him will be taken."

Now I will definitely request you to consider your own suggestion "Emotions and personal opinions aside" so that we may proceed in positive direction.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him

President is supposed to consult the CJP before the appointment of a judge. So i think, according to the constitution (article 177), president zardari did not abide by the constitution and the CJP has the right to take a suo moto action.

regards

waqarj

ARTICLE 177

(1) The Chief Justice of Pakistan shall be appointed by the President, and each of the other Judges shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice.(2) A person shall not be appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court unless he is a citizen of Pakistan and-

(a) has for a period of, or for periods aggregating, not less than five years been a judge of a High Court (including a High Court which existed in Pakistan at any time before the commencing day); or
(b) has for a period of, or for periods aggregating not less than fifteen years been an advocate of a High Court (including a High Court which existed in Pakistan at any time before the commencing day).

With due respect I wanna comment on your kind post which reflects the emotions of the nation who was deprived for 62 years without any justification.

I do respect your thought and words as this forum absorbs any kind of views here for the sake of useful debate and knowledge.

Your statement contains loads of emotional approach and pessimistism, even you did say a bitter truth about past and a debatable bitter statement about current ongoing situation.

With sincere apologies, You are not supposed to be a judge as you did dictate the opinion in between the lines.

This is a matter of interpretation of constitution and this is the job of Supreme Court of Pakistan as Hon'ble CJP did so.

Hon'ble President is a Federation symbal like CJP but we have to obey the constitution instead of commenting in harsh tones.

I do apologise again as I have a lot of respect for your kind views but when criticism exceeds its constructive boundries, Leading experts say, becomes violation.

Why are we not taking the situation as process of evolution of institutes???

As I have seen that you cleared your competitive exam, I pray for your success, but please make sure to be an optimistic as you will suppose to make policies for the country.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him

I am still adamant on my statement as there is no written clause in the constitution which says that CJP’s advice is final for the President. Being head of the State, the President has acted in a constitutional way.

Now let me bring in the emotions and personal feelings.

Above interpretation of article 177 is absolutely ill-drafted, ill-sighted and mere jugglery of words. This sounds like an absurd joke. As Gandhi jee said “a post dated check on a failing bank (read constitution)”

This guy (read Chaudary Iftikhar) has a special knack for getting into trouble with the executive. There is a pattern here. Himself a PCO judge under the great General, he doesn’t spare even his “brother judges”. His obstinacy is going to wreak havoc on our diluted political system.

They (politicians and judges) just love playing musical chairs with power and are all alike at the end of the day.

regards,
floydian

__________________
Police Service of Pakistan (PSP)
39th Common Training Program

With due respect, I want to make it clear that I don t have any issue here with binding of CJP's advice on President.

I think I could not present myself clearly. Let me try to do it again.

My question was:

Who will interprete the constitution ???

Answer is, I think, Supreme Court of Pakistan.

You should go through the official press release of Supreme Court of Pakistan before making any opinion.

Here is the link of this specified release dated 13th February 2010 on official website of Supreme Court of Pakistan.

http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/pr/Pr...2-13-02-10.pdf

After going through the case and judgement, you will definitely come to the point that your query "CJ's advice Binding on President" is out of the context.

Moreover you will come to the point that it is the matter of interpretation of constitution purely and I did post the SC's interpretation which was rejected to consider by your kind side with Mahatma's quotation.

I do also have'nt debate on this issue as precisely we are taking the current case.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him