There is nothing to be worried in this, as the upcoming PM and cabinet will give cover to all these decisions taken during that period by approving hence all these decisions will remain intact.

This is the thing that really confuses me as a student of law that the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, clearly resolves the issue in article 248(2).

“No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or a Governor in any court during his term of office.”

Also article 248(4) No civil proceedings in which relief is claimed against the President or a Governor shall be instituted during his term of office in respect of anything done by or not done by him in his personal capacity whether before or after he enters upon his office.

Looking at these clauses of the constitution, how can the Supreme Court, whose duty is to interpret the constitution, expect the Prime Minister to initiate an cases or reopen any previously made cases against President Asif Ali Zardari?

Not only that, Article 248(1) also has the same for the Prime Minister as it states that he will not be answerable to any court in the country for the actions performed during his term in office... I quote the actual words of article:

The President, a Governor, the Prime Minister, a Federal Minister, a Minister of State, the Chief Minister and a Provincial Minister shall not he answerable to any court for the exercise of powers and performance of functions of their respective offices or for any act done or purported to be done in the exercise of those powers and performance of those functions:
Provided that nothing in this clause shall be construed as restricting the right of any person to bring appropriate proceedings against the Federation or a Province.


What do you people think isn't the fact much clear from articles? I am much clear, you can form your opinion in your way...

Well Yousaf Raza Gillani has been termed to be “ineligible” by the apex court for defaming and/or ridiculing the Supreme Court. Can any one really point a finger towards him for this? Any single such incident when he might have defamed or ridiculed them?

Defaming and ridiculing is something that Nawaz and company did by attacking supreme court, how much punishment he got? redicule is something that Dr. Babar Awan did and does deserve to be punished according to the law, but why his case has been delayed? Only becuase he has left the party silently? Don't you think that court has rewarded him only on grounds of keeping distances from PPP?

In my opinion, I have never heard the unanimously elected P.M speaking against the Supreme Court in such a way other than saying that I, being a defender of the constitution, cannot open up any case against the President.

What is wrong with that? Looking at the constitution article 248, it seems perfectly fine..

Where in the constitution does it say that the Supreme Court is eligible to disqualify a member of the national assembly?

The Supreme Court is stepping over boundaries and will ultimately result to further mayhem in the country which is already under various internal as well as external threats.

If one flouts the orders of SC, it is ridiculing, disrespecting, setting a precedence for non-observance and disobeying. Hence, defaming, as an institution. Defaming and rediculing does not only mean "calling the names".

You are right in your example of Babar Awan. The SC seems to be ignoring/delaying him. However, who Mr. Awan is (just a lawyer now) and who Mr. Gillani is, at the time of proceedings (the Chief Executive of the country). So the difference in responsibility should be considered. If a sitting PM flouts the SC orders, who would obey than?


Please go through article 204 and 63 (1) (g). A clear rout of judiciary's authority to disqualify, through proper procedure, a sitting parliamentarian.




SC did not ask the government to re-open the cases against the president. It merely ordered the government to withdraw a letter written by Justice Qayum. In fact there was a mutual judicial cooperation between gov't of Pakistan and Switzerland on the cases named as Swiss Money Laundering case. The GoP became party to this case in Swiss courts but Malik Qayum, after initiation of NRO, wrote a letter to Swiss gov't that Pakistan does not want more investigations and wants to withdraw. The letter which the SC wants the gov't to write would only withdraw this letter (by Qayum). It does not automatically negates the presidential immunity which is the second step in this process.

Personally, I respect the president and am impressed by his political skills but I don't feel pride having a president allegedly involved in corruption cases. For me, he would have stepped down and would have presented himself for a time bound (say one year) transparent accountability and investigation.

The SC is not stepping over the boundaries. Whatever has been done has strictly been within the limits set by the constitution. However, the SC seems to be impartial and taking sides. This is what which is worrisome and horrendous and would have repercussions.

__________________
Ahmad Shakeel Babar
.
"If you really want to achieve something the whole universe conspires for you to get your dream realized."

You didn't get my point. I am not relating this to the Bhutto, I am saying that to establish rule of law we don't always need the sacrifices from PM's..
If CJ really want to establish rule of law, then charity begins at home... CJ should open the corruption references against the 4 sitting judges of SC.
I am not saying that CJ should spare politicians my only concern is that Justice should be equal for all.

would you please enlighten us about this case, It would be appreciated if you quote and explain this "gate" also.

__________________
"When God Want to Humiliate A Person then He Almighty Deprive him of Knowledge" Hazrat Ali A.S

Don't you think that being a member of parliament it was the duty of the Gilani to act upon the constitution? When he read article 248, how can he write any letter to open cases against sitting president which also the supreme commander of your armed forces?

Just tell me What wrong he has done? What is your opinion regarding article 248 without taking any assumptions?

__________________
Your attitude, not your aptitude, will determine your altitude...Zig Ziglar

@alimallah

The Supreme Court is stepping over boundaries and will ultimately result to further mayhem in the country which is already under various internal as well as external threats

this is your true opinion?

why did not government appeal for the immunity in the court???

__________________
"When God Want to Humiliate A Person then He Almighty Deprive him of Knowledge" Hazrat Ali A.S

Mr. Gillani did not obey the orders of the SC to write a letter to the swiss government to withdraw a letter already written by Malik Qayum. It would have set a precedence of disobeying and flouting the court orders, if went unpunished.

Article 248 says complete immunity for the president. I regard it as a necessary tool for acts without fear or favor. However, merely writing a letter (withdrawing another letter written already) would not have opened the cases. I would have stepped down in such a case where constitution say on the one hand to protect an allegedly corrupt president and on the other hand to obey the judiciary, not only constitutionally but morally as well.

Secondly, why the gov't did not take issue of immunity in SC during the proceedings? Why the gov't did not appeal against the SC Apr 26 verdict? Why the gov't did not get NRO approved from the NA, if it was really a good legislation?

Gillani, being Chief executive of the country, must take responsibility of not initiating a strong accountability system during his period.

__________________
Ahmad Shakeel Babar
.
"If you really want to achieve something the whole universe conspires for you to get your dream realized."

What does true opinion means brother?

Hmm because Gilani thought that he is obeying constitution article 248 hence no need to write letter and I second his opinion, other reason is that judiciary is biased.

Brother by withdrawing Letter written by Malik qauym means the opening of the cases at swiss courts, and article 248 does not allow it. SC ka decission maniny ki bat to baad me aati he, agr consitution mana karta he to court ne order Q kia tha? What were their intentions? In NRO there are thousands of cases, why these are not being opened? Crminal cases against MQM are pending? Can SC give any justification for such kindness?

I am not supporting Gilani/Zardari but just trying to convince you that judiciary has becoem biased and this is not good for democracy or our country.

__________________
Your attitude, not your aptitude, will determine your altitude...Zig Ziglar

I dont disagree with you, at least it seems. But I wont use the word biased rather i would say the SC has seemingly not been impartial and selective in its approach. However, the point to ponder is, even if it is selective it is still doing good, better than being idle.

__________________
Ahmad Shakeel Babar
.
"If you really want to achieve something the whole universe conspires for you to get your dream realized."