Brother 62 years have been completed ,are you still waiting for change?
as far knowing the adverse circumstance is concerned,people of pakistan have been victimized by judiciary,bureaucrats,army,and politicians despite of this,they are aloof.

Judges,politicians and army are fighting like cats and dogs just because of power,take this thing away from your mind that these are going to bring some change.

i don't want to start judiciary and its role's debate here
@ raz
they have change their priorities. in 23 april program of meray mutabiq ,it is said very clearly and loudly ,how media and lawyers are getting instructions from politicians.so you can judge what is wrong?

@waqar
brother this time its people who are saying enough is enough. look things are really getting heated up in Pakistan. somewhere this heat needs to be transferred.many changes have taken place in these 62 years.

__________________
Reality is something you rise above.

Exactly, change comes from within. Har koe apny apny hisy ka kam kar ly, ye bari ganemat hogi. Apna daman saf kar ly court hum khush ho jaengy. CJ should peep in his court system first and then think of other tiers of the state. It will be his great favour to this nation if he ensures justice in the courts. We have lots of cases in front of us in our ordinary life which are kept pending, decided with biasness and like issues. Has he taken action against those corrupt judges, court readers and their gangs? Has he taken action against those judges who are taking monthly from Sabzi Farosh of their vicinity. Court and Police both are equally involved in the victimization of general public.

In cheezon py to soch nhi rahy baki insaf power game main raha hy.

__________________
"Tumhary nafs ki qeemat Janat hay isy Janat say kam qeemat pey na bechna."
"Jiyo to istarh ky log tum sy milny ko tarsy; maro to istrah k log tumharee mot par royain"

They were hired for restoring the cj.
On the one hand,they use to meet with politicians on the other hand,they are saying that they dont want clash between judiciary and parliament.

Certainly,Parliament is more power than judiciary but C j is showing favourtism to Nawaz Sharif.
Qarz Utaro mulk sawaro,has cj ever asked to nawaz where and for what these billions of rupees were spent?

On 12th may,C j was insulted in karachi what did he do against the perpetators?

__________________
You are an eagle, flight is your vocation:
You have other skies stretching out before you.

He won't do any thing in this case, ye in ky bas ki baat nhi. I will salute him if he brings them to the books. He was not only insulted but he observed massive bloodhsed too.

__________________
"Tumhary nafs ki qeemat Janat hay isy Janat say kam qeemat pey na bechna."
"Jiyo to istarh ky log tum sy milny ko tarsy; maro to istrah k log tumharee mot par royain"

One thing i would like to highlight here,i know a person,hailing from a remote area,his bike was snatched forcibly,he went to the police station and lodged a case against the culprits who were his relatives.
Do u know what happened?
The culprits lodged a case against the person whose bike was being snatched and the judge took 50,000 rupees and sent the victimized person to gaol over baseless charge.

In my point of view,judges are more currupt than others in this sense that they have been recruited to dilever justice to people rather than injustice.

__________________
You are an eagle, flight is your vocation:
You have other skies stretching out before you.

Court coup is not possible because they don't have force. Judiciary is dependent on executive for implementation of its decisions. So, Judiciary don't have the power to depose government. It is only possible by military specially n case of Pakistan.

__________________
No matter how fast i run or how far i go it wont escape me, pain, misery, emptiness.

what to do!!!!!!!and how to bring pieace.................. but in my words, war can't bring piece but piece can stop a war... and at the time i dont think judiciary can take action agains government...

__________________
Money won't buy happiness, but it will pay the salaries of a large research staff to study the problem.

We always copy USA or U.K, they are developed countries but their judicial institutions are in their prescribed limits. After restoration Supreme Court of Pakistan is on commanding position. We can’t term the restoration of few Judges to the independence of Judiciary. In Pakistan judiciary still failed to provide speedy justice.

According to statistic number of pending cases in Balochistan High Court are 8000+ whereas this figure was around 3000 before the retirement of PCO Judges. Moreover, all of the newly appointed judges of Balochistan High Court are lawyers except one (she was serving as session judge). It will take time for lawyers to be trained in judicial affairs.

Replacement of all of the judges of Balochistan severely affected the smooth working of judicial set up. Moreover, there is a no criterion for appointment of justice, although session judges have quota in High Courts. Experienced session judges were ignored in these appointments who are adept in this field as compare to lawyers. People want justice not Justices. There is no justice even inside judiciary then how can they provide relief to common people.

All the PCO Justices were merely victimized on personal grounds because they did not resigned after imposition of emergency. Current Judicial set up is also comprised of those judges who endorsed the military coup in 1999 but no one raised question in this context.

I don’t think that judiciary in Pakistan is independent; it is revolving around a single person. After his retirement judiciary will restore to previous position as we had in the past. Instead if capturing power personally whole of the judicial set up should be overhauled completely and steps to be taken to ensure independence of judiciary in every level from districts to capital.

__________________
No matter how fast i run or how far i go it wont escape me, pain, misery, emptiness.

Claims invisible force trying to pit parliament against judiciary; an eye-opening interview with PML-N spokesman

By Ahmad Noorani

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) has officially stated that the judiciary can lose its respect and its role will become controversial if it hears the petitions, challenging the 18th Amendment passed by an overwhelming majority of the elected parliament.

Clearly and openly backtracking from the PML-N’s previous stance of safeguarding the independence of the judiciary, PML-N’s official spokesman Ahsan Iqbal while talking to The News said that on the question of interpretation of the 18th Amendment his party would only accept the decision of parliament.

At one point Ahsan said: “the PML-N will not accept the Supreme Court’s judgment” but subsequently he changed his statement to “the PML-N will only accept the decision of parliament.” “See, what parliament has done is a grand national consensus and the judiciary should respect it,” Ahsan replied at one point while talking to The News.

Ahsan was asked that if the Supreme Court gives a judgment on the interpretation of some of the controversial clauses of the 18th Amendment would his party accept it wholeheartedly or not. He replied: “the PML-N will only accept the decision of parliament, which has already been delivered in the form of the passage of this amendment in the National Assembly and the Senate. The verdict of parliament will be accepted and respected by all and sundry.”

Ahsan said that the 18th Amendment was not an ordinary amendment but it was a mega national political consensus and was approved by all the political parties with unprecedented harmony. Ahsan went on to say that the 18th Amendment was in fact a new social contract.

On the question regarding the acceptance of the apex court’s judgment Ahsan Iqbal further said: “By dragging the issue of the 18th Amendment into the courts the judiciary will come face to face with all the political forces of the country,” and added: “By indulging in this the judiciary can lose its respect, its role will become controversial and it will be completely isolated.”

Right after saying these words Ahsan immediately declared that the present crisis was being sponsored by invisible forces, which wanted to come to power on the props of others. By crisis Ahsan was referring to the filing of petitions in the Supreme Court and the ongoing national debate on the question of judicial review and apex court’s powers to review or strike down any law or constitutional amendments.

While Ahsan was taking a new line, his party had formally submitted serious and severe objections during the proceedings of the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms (PCCR) against the sitting federal law minister and the attorney general in the new proposed judicial commission as its members had declared it against the independence of judiciary.

Ahsan stated that in fact there was a force, which was upset because of the creation of two powerful institutions; a powerful parliament and a powerful and independent judiciary. Without taking the name of the Pakistan Army, Ahsan further said that this force had only one solution to all its miseries and that was to bring these two institutions at the loggerheads.

“Only such a situation could help this force in achieving its objectives,” Ahsan said. Ahsan said that in making the 18th Amendment there was no innovation in the scheme of our Constitution rather it was the implementation of the Charter of Democracy (CoD). He said that mediamen who were now objecting to the 18th Amendment and its judiciary appointment- related clauses should keep this in mind that the CoD was signed in 2006 when there was no sign of any judicial crisis. This historic document remained in the market for more than three years but no one objected to any of the points raised in it.

Ahsan defended the clause relating to final approval of judges appointments recommended by the judicial commission by a parliamentary committee comprising politicians by saying that it would not be an approval but only parliamentary oversight.

He said that some elements in the media were claiming parliamentary oversight was only for judges’ appointment whereas it would be applicable to all constitutional appointments including the chief election commissioner. Ahsan further said that parliamentary oversight was not a unique thing and even in the present on-going process of reform in the Turkish constitution the method of parliamentary oversight was being adopted.

Ahsan was asked that as per the documents available with The News, the PML-N itself had objected that the law minister and the attorney general should not be members and instead the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association should be a member of the judicial commission, then why his party was backtracking from its stance.

Ahsan was of the view that the stance taken in the meetings of the PCCR was the point of view of the party at that time. “Now as the amendment has been passed by parliament so what I am saying right now is the present and final view of my party.”

Ahsan at one stage said that clauses regarding judges’ appointment were later modified only in accordance with the CoD but when asked about the deadlock in case of equal votes in the judicial commission was highlighted by the media he (Ahsan) did not agree.

However, when reminded acknowledgement of this fact had even been admitted in the PML-N’s note of reiteration submitted in the PCCR, Ahsan admitted the fact.

On the question that it was widely believed in concerned circles of Islamabad that the 18th Amendment’s clauses relating to empowering the party chiefs were in fact incorporated after the agreement in a secret meeting of the top two or three leaders of the PPP and the PML-N, Ahsan rejected the allegation saying everything was decided in a committee comprising members from all the political parties.

Asked that vote of a parliamentarian for a constitutional amendment was in fact a vote of his or her conscience so why the parliamentarians had been bound to follow the instructions of the parliamentary party chief, Ahsan admitted that this clause was not right.

He said that this clause was the result of the circumstances faced by the political forces in the nineties and repeated events of floor crossing. Ahsan said that according to his opinion this and some similar clauses were inserted in the Constitution for the time being and these would be removed after a few years, as the country’s political system would achieve some maturity.

On the question why the proceedings of the PCCR were kept highly confidential while the process of legislation or constitution making had always been kept open for public debate during all of its steps, Ahsan said that if the proceedings of the committee had been kept open, the political forces would have never reached any agreement.

When asked if it was such a controversial amendment that not a single clause of the whole amendment was discussed in any house of parliament in detail and members voted only according to the orders of their party’s leadership, Ahsan said that it happened, as the issues were already discussed in detail during the PCCR meetings having representation of all the parties, which were secret.

Ahsan was short of words when asked to give a single example from anywhere in the world where such secret and confidential proceedings were held to make a constitution or constitutional amendment.
source:http://thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=28467

nawaz sb ka pm bunna itna zarori he k poori party he dobney ko tyar he?

Court is going to do something and leaders are worried.
scared leaders trying to avoid fear by counter -threatening

court lost its support : ppp gone ,pml-n gone now,lawyers half of them gone
only support left is people

__________________
Reality is something you rise above.