Minus Two Formula by PPP : Nation Boils in Anger
By Rohail Butt • Apr 24th, 2008 • Category: Politics • 8 Comments •When the whole country was on fire due to the stubborn policies of Musharraf, and when both PML-N and PPP were under the axe and Musharraf was using every trick in the bag to harm them, March 9, 2007 heralded new hope in Pakistan and rendered these parties a new life. Political parties also struggled and rallied for the independence of the judiciary and the restoration of the deposed judges including Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary.
But now as the mandate is safely in their pockets, these parties are talking something else. Especially the PPP’s stance is very suspicious and they are vying hard to somehow keep the deposed chief justice out or confined somehow. When they were in opposition, they never talked about any constitutional package or any Minus-One or Minus-Two formula or anything about shorterning the job period of chief justice.
They even didn’t say in the Bhurban Accord and there is no mention of any constitutional package in the Bhurban declaration. But now as the time of action comes, PPP pukes. A stalemate has formed between PPP and PML-N over this reinstatement issue as PPP demands it be linked to constitutional amendments to restrict the tenure of chief justice or that a ‘minus two’ formula be adopted, leaving deposed CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry and Justice Javed Iqbal out of the new apex court, that has brought the issue back to centre stage. A committee is now being formed to try and hammer out a solution, but this committee is still inconclusive in its decisions.
President Musharraf will fight to his last breath in Army House to make sure that judiciary is not restored. PPP is in sync with him. Law Minister Farooq H. Naek is openly meeting with Musharraf’s lawyer Sharifuddin Pirzada and other members of current apex court and the news is that the constitutional package is coming from the top and it’s the give by PPP to Musharraf as it takes NRO, waiving of BA degree and the government in Balochistan and elsewhere.
People of Pakistan are showing their outrage and they are genuinely angry. They simply want their judges restored and they voted for it. They know that the restoration of judges means ouster of Musharraf and the security of promise of free and agile justice in the future. Zardari may be hooked up due to his NRO and non-graduation status, but the Pakistani nation is not.
Trackback URL
|
|
|
Rohail Butt
Email this author | All posts by Rohail Butt
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Loading ...
The issue of the restoration of judges has come to supersede all else in the country.
I dont think PPP would dare to eliminate CJP Iftikhar altogether. There is no base and logic for the Minus Two or Minus One formulae. If they restrict CJP’s tenure to 5 or 4 years even then CJP would get one or two years to show his mettle.
dictators increased the tenure of CJP because they had become habitual of people like Justice Munir.
Dr. Imran, yes I agree that if they restore CJP then the tenure clause is not so bad, as who knows who would come after Iftikhar
Sure, I am also in favour of setting time period for CJP. If it is applicable for President, Prime Minister, Assemblies, Armed Forces Chiefs (except dictators) then they can fix time limit for CJP position also.
Article 177
Clause (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.
………………………………………………………………………………………..
Article193
Clause (1)
A Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation-
(a) With the Chief Justice of Pakistan;
(b) With the Governor concerned; and
(c) Except where the appointment is that of Chief Justice,
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Article195.
A Judge of a High Court shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-two years, unless he sooner resigns or is removed from office in accordance with the Constitution.
Subs by Act No.III/2003,dt 31-12-2003
………………………………………………………………………………………………
Article179.
1 A Judge of the Supreme Court shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-five years, unless he sooner resigns or is removed from office in accordance with the Constitution.
1 Subs. by Act No III/2003,dated 31-12-2003
……………………………………………………………………………………
Loyalty to the state and obedience to the constitution
• Article 5.
Clause(1)
Loyalty to the State is the basic duty of every citizen.
Clause(2)
Obedience to the Constitution and law is the (inviolable) obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.
…………………………………………………………………………………….
Article 6.
Clause (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 un-constitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.
Clause (2)
Any person aiding or abetting the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.
Clause (3)
(Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.
………………………………………………………………………………………
Restriction on discussion in Majlis-e-Shoora
• Article68.
No discussion shall take place in Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) with respect to the conduct of any Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court in the discharge of his duties.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
Disqualification as member of shoora
Article63.
Clause(1)
A person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as, and from being, a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), if—
(g) he is propagating any opinion, or acting in any manner, prejudicial to the Ideology of Pakistan, or the sovereignty, integrity or security of Pakistan, or morality, or the maintenance of public order, or the integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan, or which defames or brings into ridicule the judiciary or the Armed Forces of Pakistan;
or‘Subs. by the Legal Framework Order, 2002 (c. E’s O. No. 24 of 2002), Art. 3 and Sch., for paragraph (p).2Subs. by the Legal Framework Order, 2002 (c. E’s, O. No. 24 of 2002), Art. 3 and Sch., for the full-stop, which was further amended by C. E’s. O. No. 29 of 2002, Art. 2.3New pragraph (s) added and shall be deemed always to have been so added ibid., ibid.,4Subs. by C. E’s. O. No. 24 of 2002, Art. 3 and Sch., for cl(2).
…………………………………………………………………………………….
The Objectives Resolution to form part of substantive provision
Article 2A.
The principles and provisions set out in the Objectives Resolution reproduced in the Annex are hereby made substantive part of the Constitution and shall have effect accordingly.
Added by P.O.No.6 of 1985, Art.2 (w.e.f. the Ist July, 1981).
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Laws not to be Altered, Repealed or Amended without the Previous Sanction of the President.
SIXTH SCHEDULE
• Article 268 (2)
Number Description of Regulation
2 The Removal from Service (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1969
12 The Removal from Service (Special Provisions) Regulation, 1972. 14.
The Removal from Service (Review Petition) Regulation, 1972.
extract has been taken from my previous article restoration of judiciary ,available on net .please go throughit .
Explanation Layman’s overview
Article,2A,6,10,63,68,176,177,179,193,195,204,209,210,211,268,270,
270AA,270B,270C,271,273,275, with its clauses are all supportive to the well mannered design and habitual act of forgery and malicious modus operandi of these all time favourites of dictators perishing in the contest of prominent and imminent constitutional expert of all reign.
Under such strict obligatory amendment although movement to restore the institution is justified but the way to the throne by these fortune teller will require a magical eve.
In order to conclude the discussion in a lay man terminology, which is the, part and parcel of my discussion, and of course to familiarise the fellow man that it is the same attitude of ignorance , in attentiveness and carelessness to abort our own belonging, that has been made fate by the mother of all mischief .
In spite of the clear image and particular scent of the person responsible for all these reservations and continuous rape of the constitution, I am astonishingly looking to see a glimpse or an episode from the so called commentators, anchors, journalist and the media to engage the all time responsible, so to ask the individual as what is his reservation to Pakistan and its people ,for his such retaliating attitude to please the successors and dictators, at the cost and sacrifice of constitution.
Curtailing the discussion to reach a reasonable fate to the upcoming event in the contest of restoration seems to be a myth and a real myth buster is required to prove and restore it.The only platform where reversion can takes place lies in the hand of the executive and the benches to understand and uphold the desire and institution.
issue of judiciary from day one was decided and under no circumstances unless approved and only ordered by president ,can these justices be restored .no one including the primeminister and the assembly can not issue these orders .as per new law if assembly approves a resolution unanimously then it will be forwarded to the senate for review .and if senate approves it unanimosly then it will be forwarded to the president .however if senate does not agree it will be reverted to the assembly for review and float again to senate as per objection.on approval of the senate order will go to the president for approval and if he disaggree it will go to the senate for further submission to assembly .in other case only judiciary can interfere and interpretate and since the present judiciary are the side kicks of president ,he will never be topel down .so lets enjouy sights and scenes of pakistan as designed by ever gree enemy of pakistan sharif uddin pirzada ,the father of constitutional crime.
Asif Zardari is a responsible man, he and his party represent the majority and PML-N is a minor memeber of the coalition and we have to respect PPP’s decision. I dare them to take whatever they consider the best decision in the supreme national interest. If egos are bruised, so be it!
The former CJ is history. His fate was decided on that day of infamy in November 1997 when the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Mr. Justice Syed Sajjad Ali Shah was attacked, humiliated, insulted to run for his life from the chair during proceedings of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. This highest court was contempted and honour of this sacred institution along with its chief justice was desecrated in broad day light. What did we do - nothing. We the concienceless, shameless people, that day we watched this act of infamy as silent helpless spectators. Who was responsible the goons and minions of the then “democratically” elected party PML-N with so called “heavy mandate” under the direct supervisions of its degenerated leadership. The parliament was helpless (remember they were all coerced into passing that 14th Amendment in our constitution) as they had agreed to be casterated by the ruling party.
Had this not taken place or had the perpetrators punished for this crime. No one including the last government wold have dared to touch the CJ and the Supreme Court. We had provided them a precendence; it is OK now if it was OK then.
Dear shri Butt,
I am surprised at the innocense of commentators about this issue of Justice Choudhry.
They must understand that it is nothing to do with RULE OF LAW. It has everything to do with POLITICS means MONEY!
It has everything to do with Privitisation of PAKISTANI STEEL MILLS TO A CONSORTIUM OF SAUDI/RUSSIAN/PAKISTANI GROUP FOR A PITTANCE OF 2.73 BILLION PAKISTANI RUPEES.
People who are interested in this CJP issue must try to find out who is the pakistani consortium who were supporitng this privitisation?
Who are THE SAUDIES/
wHO ARE THE RUSSIANS?