aoa dear members.i have some independent thoughts over the issue but before bringing my own i would first comment on the discussion of the two respectable members

@floydian & tx ned
whatever u both are saying is accurate n in line w/ the prevailing practice.the issue is all about what,who should have done n what not.the dispute is:
First CJ(who should by law be consulted for appointment of judges)is saying he wasn't consulted
Second executive denying the same n saying that he was...
at the out look it seems like settling personal scores but in real its not n from here my personal thought begins

My opinion:
the clash b/w judiciary n executive is healthy.CJ whatever his personal being is,holds an office which has potential to bring a change.judiciary in the past have been exploited by the so called doctrine of necessity, n today if institutions are themselves,rather than the executive,are taking corrective measures,empowering the institutions for finally achieving the desired level of good governance,this is some thing to celebrate....democracy has its own corrective measures,it is said,so we must not fear the judiciary taking unfair advantage of public's trust....
praying for enlightenment of minds
Regards

Are you into fortune-telling or forecasting business ?

I have made my stance very clear.

Furthermore, CJ's recommendations are in contrast with the seniority rule, as established by the famous Judges case. Such recommendation by itself is debatable and against constitutional norms.

(Bold fonts are stressful to the eyes)

regards,
floydian

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

I do respect your kind comments as part of this debate. I think if you have any logical ground, then please present that one instead of being rigid like this.

I did not tell any fortune as I predicted you a logical man who needs information about the case to make a solid opinion for which I did share the link of official press release by Supreme Court of Pakistan.

You are most welcome if you don't want to go through the release and insist to be firm on your "I know the best policy".

Supreme Court of Pakistan has explained the same consultation procedure several times and 25 judges were appointed without consideration of seniority principle since 1950.

Hon'ble President did appoint 5 judges without any seniority rule in his current Presidency tenure as per Ehsan Iqbal in a talk show named "Off the record" dated 15th Feb 2010.

Anyways I have no debate here to change your mind as if you wont beleive that interpretation of constitution is by Supreme Court only.

I do consider the wise stance of Government on this issue as Hon'ble President did also express his respect on Supreme Court's decision.

Same was the statement of Information Minister as PPP is clear in her views that Supreme Court is authority to over-write the Presidential order.

I do appreciate PPP as Information Minister was quite clear in his views to implement the SC's 18th Feb 2010 decision.

He was also considering the said misunderstanding as difference of opinions and path of democratic maturity.

I do apologise if my words hurt your feelings as I do respect your opinion and have no concerns with destructive criticism.

I would appreciate if you could logically comment on the case.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him

Aoa
Healthy n heated debate is going on.
Its our fortune that we always consider some people as super human beings, as we do cj nowadays.Cj should not have taken suo moto action at nite without hearing ex party,its unconstitutional.Clash wil only destroy system. Now the (N)leauge wants to encash this issue.For God sake dont let judiciary be politicised.System must survive at any cost.Cj has become personel to zardari, in the hearing of NRO case, he spent 5 days on Swis account interrogation n he uttered no word for remaining thousands nro people's fate. May i ask y?is it justice? for this biased attitude people of pakistan sacrificed their lives to reinstate him? off course not. He should be impartial other wise he wil lose his popularity among the mases.Zardari is a fudal so we should nt expect any un expected thing from him.He deserves not more than a designation of UC Nazim.
May Allah save this country.

__________________
When you try, you risk failure. When you don’t try, you ensure it.

@floydian
While deciding a case or interpreting the constitution when there are ambigous words the supreme court has the right 2 cite cases of diffrenet courts of the world 2 explain the meaning of such words.supreme court did the same.u r right that there is no provision in the constitution which says that CJ advice is final bt precedent of this case says that the consultation must be effective and meaningful and must allow the consultee the power to reject to reject the nomination.

if some one object this power of supreme court in this case which iz based on solid reasons they should also object the present position of the president and compare it to the original constitution.precedent play the same role in the decisions of the courts which play amendments in the constitution.

Beautiful and awesome conclusive opinion this is !! what you present here, but I do request you to please consider both of the personalities (Hon'ble CJP and Hon'ble President) as Federation Symbals.

I do also respect your kind emotions and pessimistic criticism but I wanna request to take the undergoing case as "Evolutionary Process".

Hoping you might be agree with me that all institutes in the state are immature and on way to gonna strengthen.

This developing phase will definitely take some time, like a machine with 4 or 5 parts which were improperly placed; badly affected and need overhauling. Now Overhauling is done and all parts are going to be placed accordingly on their exact and proper place. They require time to fix on their positions and work effectively and efficiently.


Same like case is with our system (Country), parts (Parliament, Judiciary, Executive, Bureaucracy and Media) are entangling before fixing on their proper positions to give an efficient output.

Kind Regards

__________________
You cannot hate a person when you know him

The comments shows your approach and study.
Being a political scientist The government act was valid,as the original constituion of 1973,under article 177 says that 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.

BUT in ALjihad trust case,there came the seniority issue,means the senior most judge shall be appionted as cheif justic.

But under 17th amendment, the president shall appiont all judges of supreme and high court,without the consultation of Cheif justice,

Now you ppl tell me,the President of pakistan has the power to appiont any judge under 17 amendment.
Wake up....17 amendment is still in action,if it is curtailed then this act of president would have been cosidered as illegal.

__________________
In politics... never retreat, never retract... never admit a mistake.

ur legal explaintion is quite convincing(regarding 17th ammandment n all) but are u suggesting that the action of gvt is right by the law n CJ is unjustly uping the ant???pls throw some light.
Regards

__________________
Stop counting your problems rather raise for their solution and BEGIN JIHAD.

Yes 100 % legal..bcz the president has the power to do so...

__________________
In politics... never retreat, never retract... never admit a mistake.

doesn't it sound unfair n undemocratic?im not talking paricularly of this issue,why there are things in the constitution like descretion??isn't unfair?what keeps check on such descretions n what is the remedy if these are unfair?in the case u mentioned above the gvt followed rule of seniority,on the the occasion it violates the same while promoting no. of CSPs w/o following any rule of law.
as to the issue in hand the descretion of the president in appointing judges is not unqualified.he can follow his wishes,after consultation w/ CJ, if they do not go against the set rules of law.
or there is a way out?pls comment
regards

__________________
Stop counting your problems rather raise for their solution and BEGIN JIHAD.