Archive for the ‘Masters’ Category

h1

Injustice In the Court of Law –

February 11, 2014

I would like to call myself a patriotic member of civil society of Pakistan. One who is currently witnessing the state of Pakistan being dismantled piece by piece with the help of a pillar of state called the “Judiciary”. The spearhead of this campaign against Pakistan was started by no one else but the former Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Chaudhry. He took oath under Provisional Constitutional Order, then used his influence illegally for corruption, when questioned by then President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf – he went to coup the state by using the law society of Pakistan……The battle ended with his restoration.

images

The next episode of one sided battle started in court of law barely a month after Pervez Musharraf’s arrival in Pakistan, the former Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry, issued a challenge, daring people to step forward and bring up charges against Pervez Musharraf. Can you imagine any CJ of a country behaving in this manner? Iftikhar Chaudhry has been overly politicized and compromised for years and has always viewed Musharraf as his arch enemy. Clearly Chaudhry had nothing else but revenge in his agenda. For a long time the Chief Justice has been demanding the Federal Government to bring forth treason charges against Pervez Musharraf. When the government politely declined – such as for instance the Caretaker Government – the Supreme Court could not take no for an answer and maintained an argumentative behaviour with the Caretaker Government, insisting the latter bring forth treason charges against Pervez Musharraf, thereby allowing the ever so eager Supreme Court to proceed with the matter.

This is very interesting given the fact that in Pakistani law, the Supreme Court has absolutely no right to request – let alone demand – the Federal Government to bring forth charges against any individual or group. The Supreme Court cannot request, demand, pressurize and incite the Government to bring to its attention any case. Thus, by constantly pressurizing the Federal Government to proceed with the treason charges against Musharraf, the Supreme Court has violated the law of the land and exposing its utterly biased attitude.

Now coming to the the case of treason against Pervez Musharraf follows the bizarre logic: In November 2007, Pervez Musharraf imposed temporary Emergency Rule in Pakistan. As a result, some sections of the Pakistani Constitution were temporarily suspended, or held in abeyance. This is said to be treason against the State because Article 6 of the Constitution of Pakistan states that holding the Constitution in abeyance is an act of treason.

Responses

A. Article 232 of the Pakistani Constitution permits the President to impose Emergency Rule under certain situations. As long as the President is satisfied that a situation or a state of affairs exists which warrants Emergency rule, the latter can be imposed.

Article 232 (1)
If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a Provincial Government to control, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency.”
Therefore, imposing Emergency Rule is not akin to “treason” as it is permitted by the Pakistani Constitution. One may disagree with the reasons for imposing the Emergency, yet imposing it is not “treason” or a “punishable crime” even if the underlying reasons are deemed to be weak.

B. In 2007, Article 6 of the Constitution did not state that holding the Constitution in abeyance or suspending it was an act of “treason.” This is the 2007 version of the text of Article 6:
“(1) Any person who abrogates or attempts or conspires to abrogate, subverts or attempts or conspires to subvert the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.”
In 2010, however, through the 18th Amendment, the above text was altered as follows (italics added):
“(1)Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.”
In 2007, suspending or holding the Constitution in abeyance was not an act of high treason. In 2010, however, suspending and holding the Constitution in abeyance became an act of high treason.
It is legally and rationally ridiculous to retroject this backwards to try Pervez Musharraf – or anyone else for that matter – for having allegedly committed “high treason.”

C. Those who have presumed Pervez Musharraf to be guilty of high treason convey the impression as if Pervez Musharraf was working in isolation, in a vacuum, making decisions on his own, with no other individual present in the scene. This scenario is highly unrealistic. The text of the Proclamation of Emergency Rule itself mentions the “prime minister, governors of all four provinces and with the chairman joint chiefs of staff committee, chiefs of the armed forces, vice chief of army staff and corps commanders of the Pakistan army” who deliberated upon the situation and then requested the President – Pervez Musharraf – to impose Emergency Rule in Pakistan. However, as far as I can tell, no one has been questioned. To successfully implement the Emergency rule, individuals (Civil Servants etc), judges and departments at all levels were required to play their part. None of them have been questioned. In fact, the Law Minister of that time – Zaid Hamid Khan – who played a pivotal role in designing and implementing the Emergency Rule in 2007 is presently a senior member of Nawaz Sharif’s party and was once again appointed as the Law Minister, only to be made to resign shortly thereafter due to the embarrassment caused on account of his role as the Law Minister in 2007!

This trial is nothing but blatant discrimination against Pervez Musharraf and a Violation of Article 25 & 6: By having a go at Musharraf by the Supreme Court and the Sharif Government itself. Article 25 is the equality clause – it calls for a lack of discrimination. Likewise, Article 6 is also not being adhered to. This trial can be an important turning point for Pakistan if one believes in the following quote by Martin Luther King.

injustice quotes

Two forms of blatant discrimination are being carried out:

Another important point in this matter that November 2007 imposition of temporary Emergency Rule is a comparatively minor matter – compared to the actual Military (counter) coup of 1999. The latter is the main issue, not the 2007 Emergency. Were it not for the fact that a Military (counter) coup transpired in 1999, the minor matter of the November 2007 Emergency would not have taken place. In light of the High Treason Act, the application of Article 6 cannot be limited to the 2007 Emergency. The 1999 Military (counter) coup needs to be considered. Even then, Article 6 cannot be restricted to the 1999 Military (counter) coup. The dark era of the Zia regime also needs to be considered, including all prior Military takeovers. According to the High Treason Act, from 1958 onwards, every military coup is to be considered and all involved – directly and indirectly – are to be tried and punished. Thus, by singling out Pervez Musharraf and by restricting the proceedings to the comparatively very minor matter of the imposition of temporary Emergency Rule in November 2007, the Supreme Court and the Sharif Government are violating both Articles 6 & 25 of the Constitution and are also ignoring the High Treason Act, which permits the trial of everyone involved in a coup – whether directly or indirectly – from 1958 onward.

Either all are tried or none are tried. Either all regimes are considered or none are considered. There must be across the board justice to ensure fairness and transparency. Picking and choosing should not be allowed
However, we all know that the reason for Ignoring the 1999 Military (counter) Coup is that Iftikhar Chaudhry was one of the judges who took oath under the PCO order.

Army Officers, Politicians, Judges, Bureaucrats, Journalists all need to be tried and punished if they played any part – directly or indirectly – in supporting, maintaining, defending, strengthening and legitimising a Military takeover/regime.

Oath taking ceremony of Iftikhar Chaudhry

Oath taking ceremony of Iftikhar Chaudhry

• Corrupt and biased Judges such as Iftikhar Chaudhry, who legitimized the Army’s rightful counter coup of 1999, must be taken to court for the matter and justice should be served upon them with full force

• The current two times failed Prime Minister should immediately resign – along with all of his colleagues who aided and abetted the dictator Zia. They must then be brought before the law for violating the Pakistani Constitution multiple times.

Finally, one should recall that Ch. Shujaat Hussain has already put himself forward to be tried in court for treason under Article 6 but the federal government is yet to include his name in the case.

As justice cannot be forced upon selectively –
Author: Asad Baig
Email : Ashbaig80@gmail.com

***Material pointing towards the different Articles of Constitution Pakistan has been researched by Usman Sheikh.***

h1

Redundancies :-(

January 15, 2009

comic

 The big “Strictly Private & Confidential” letter was given out on the 14th of January. Following it, yesterday Barclays Leeds announced it will be cutting 100 jobs from the mortgage area of business. 100 of our colleagues will face the axe in this cluster of retail banking. In total there will 4300 job cuts in Barclays.

It’s sad to see things fall apart this way. It was a expected news but few of my colleagues were under the quandary that Barclays won’t be effected by the credit crunch and because of this they were under a state of shock yesterday.  It is always hard to digest the news of redundancy and there are many factors to it. People have emotional attachment to their work and colleagues. Moreover, you just get used to coming in everyday and doing your thing. Very soon all this will change for many of our colleagues. 
 

The question which keeps popping up in my head is where will the 100 staff go? There are no jobs in the financial sector anymore and all the other sectors are not recruiting.  This morning I have been looking at some recruitment sites and the vacancy listed are lousy. Most of the jobs are listed with nearly every recruitment agency which means that there will be a hell lot of competition on every vacancy. An example of competition will be that the other day I applied for a Sales Manager position with one of the largest blue chip companies in the U.K. I was invited to the interview but the date of the interview was after 3 weeks (surprisingly a very long wait). Upon inquiring the reason for this, I was told that there were 1200 applicants for 4 sales manager jobs. Wow, innit?. This credit crunch has become worst than aids. It’s effecting so many people so quickly and it is crippling the economy. On the other hand the government is running out of money to pay people who are on dole. It surely is a lose lose situation. Even if anyone does get into another job there are still risks involved of redundancy there in the future….. CRAP!!!!!!!!

 

Based on all this, my decision is to start a master’s course this September and probably study something in the health sector. NHS will can pay the course fee and I can apply for a maintenance grant. By the time the qualification is achieved the market will be much more settled and it might even land me into a different and more excellent career. I still need to give it a detail thought. 

It’s only January ‘09 and already there have been around 10,000 job losses…..

 

It time to make the right choice NOW!

 

Sigh!!! I have got my first 1-1 for the consultation process…