Pakistan's Chief Justice Awarded Medal of Freedom

Honorable Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry inspired a lawyers' revolution against autocracy

On March 9, 2007, Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry said "no" to President Pervez Musharraf's request that he resign, and his defiance sparked a revolution of lawyers who refused to allow guns to drown out the voice of the law.

Chaudhry said, "I felt that I was only doing the duty of my conscience." But as the rule of man threatened to overwhelm the rule of law, his defiance guided Pakistan's march to justice. "It was the proclamation of a new manifesto for Pakistan, a declaration that the pursuit of justice cannot be subverted."

The military stormed the Supreme Court and placed the justices under house arrest, but lawyers intensified the pressure on the foundation of the government, eroding support for the dictator. The march to the rule of law toppled Musharraf, and on August 18, 2008, he entered his resignation from the presidency.

The Medal of Freedom is the highest honor given by the Harvard Law School Association, and has previously been awarded to the team which litigated Brown v. Board of Education and to South African President Nelson Mandela.

Chief Justice Chaudhry was officially recognized with the award in November 2007, during the period of his house arrest in Pakistan, but he was only recently able to come to the United States to receive the honor. Dean Kagan, in presenting the award, praised Chaudhry, stating that his contribution to the rule of law was inestimable. He accepted the award on behalf of all the lawyers, professionals and students who ran the movement for the rule of law in Pakistan.

Chief Justice Chaudhry acknowledged that there is still a long road ahead as the people fight to turn the wheels of history toward constitutional order in Pakistan. The entrenched politicians, who are highly organized, are being squeezed on the one side by militant insurgents and on the other by judicial insurgents. The answer, he said, is the rule of law, which is "inhospitable to both dictatorship and terror."

As the Pakistani judiciary moves toward the independence needed to protect a stable constitutional order, Chief Justice Chaudhry predicts the rule of law will be a boon to the developing nation's economy. "The struggle now is about separation of power, the role of the judiciary, rule of law and ridding the judiciary of enslavement to the executive." This battle is one that has been won by peaceful means before. "The Pakistani gun has a history of winning over Pakistani law. The law should win over the gun."

Source: Harvard Law Record (Harvard Law School’s Independent Newspaper)

Iftikhar receives prestigious freedom medal

NEW YORK: Deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has made a stirring appeal to 'America’s judicial, legal and academic fraternities' to help Pakistan’s judiciary discard the 'rule of man' and establish the rule of law.

'What we have is rule of man. What we need is rule of law. What we cannot live without is a judiciary that is immune to political interference,' said Justice Iftikhar at Harvard Law School in Cambridge (Massachusetts) on Wednesday.

He said: 'You must help Pakistan transform itself. Rule of law is Pakistan’s national consensus. And we must all side with Pakistan’s national consensus.'

Justice Iftikhar made the speech after he was awarded the prestigious medal of freedom, an honour bestowed on two other recipients, South African leader Nelson Mandela and Justice Thurgood Marshall of the US Supreme Court.

He told a large gathering of students and faculty members: 'I stand here for all those Pakistanis who have risen against despotism, dictatorship, brutality, tyranny and injustice. I also stand here for all those Pakistanis who stand for the principle that no one is above the law and all those Pakistanis who agree with Thomas Paine that ‘in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other’.'

He said that Pakistani autocrats, whether uniformed or otherwise, were trying to turn the wheels of history in the wrong direction.

'Our autocrats, whether uniformed or otherwise, while decreeing a democratic order are, at the same time, postponing the establishment of an independent judiciary to an ever more distant future. Such democracy is bound to fail; you can’t have a constitutional democracy without security of tenure for the judges,' he added.

In Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar said, both civilian as well as uniformed autocrats had been influencing judicial decision-making for the past six decades.

He pointed out that judicial reforms were a high stake venture and said every reform undertaking had potential losers and potential gainers. 'Potential losers, if our judiciary is to become truly independent, include civilian as well as uniformed politicians and our intelligence agencies.

Potential gainers: the general population at large and the economy. There are two problems: First, potential losers are also our principal decision-makers so they resist reforms. Second, potential losers are organised, potential gainers are not.'

Justice Iftikhar said that economies of countries which had 'rule of law' prospered as against dictatorships and autocracies.

'Remember, almost all of Fortune 500 companies are a product of economies where the law rules supreme. At the same time, the poorest of the poor continue to dwell in countries where men govern as opposed to law. A government of laws stimulates economic growth. A government of men impedes economic growth,' he said.

Tribute paid to Justice Iftikhar at NY bar ceremony

NEW YORK, Nov 18: Deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry received Honorary Membership of the New York City Bar Association on Monday.

President of the association Patricia Hynes presented a framed citation to Justice Iftikhar in recognition of his efforts to uphold the rule of law.

“This is a very proud moment for our association,” Ms Hynes told Justice Iftikhar. “We are proud to be your colleagues,” she said.

A large gathering of lawyers and other guests gave him a standing ovation.Expressing his gratitude to members of the association, Justice Iftikhar said he had accepted the honour in the name of the people of Pakistan who have struggled against military dictatorship, tyranny and injustice.

“No democracy can survive without an independent judiciary. There can be no democracy without law. Lack of justice produces inequalities. Only independent judiciary can checkmate extremism”, he said.

“While parliament is sovereign, the courts too have a vital function,” he added.He paid tribute to American lawyers for supporting the lawyers’ movement in Pakistan in their struggle to restore independence of judiciary. Pakistani lawyers, especially the young, have been in the forefront of the struggle.Justice Iftikhar was introduced by US Judge Jed Rakoff who praised his courage in upholding the rule of law.

He recalled some of Justice Iftikhar’s important judgments, which went against the establishment, despite the pressures brought on him. He praised him for standing up to former president Pervez Musharraf so that the cause of justice was upheld, a stance that endeared him to the people.

Judge Rakoff narrated in detail the hardships Justice Iftikhar underwent after being ousted by Gen (retd) Musharraf and said he never gave up.Justice Iftikhar is the eighth person to be conferred honorary membership by the New York City Bar.

Prior recipients include former Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist and former Chief Justice of India P.N. Bhagwati. Former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association Aitzaz Ahsan presented to the New York City Bar Association a crest on behalf of Pakistani lawyers as an expression of gratitude to New York’s lawyers community for their support.

A thumping victory!

By Nauman Qaiser

‘Kurd’ is a brand name with considerable cachet. That’s why, the marketing gurus of the lawyers’ movement did not need to burn midnight oil to secure a thumping victory for Mr. Ali Ahmed Kurd as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association. Moreover, this victory was a forgone conclusion, given the support pro-movement lawyers enjoy among the legal fraternity on the one hand; and deteriorating standing of the pro-government lawyers led by the Attorney General, the law minister, and, to the chagrin of many Jiyalaz, Malik Qayyum, on the other hand. Even the use of government machinery by the law minister and his cahoots to buy the votes of the senior lawyers by bribing them different legal posts did not bear fruit.

This victory, which, in a way, is reminiscent of Feb 18 triumph of the democratic forces, is indeed a new beginning, a new awakening, a new impetus for the movement of independence of judiciary, rule of law and supremacy of constitution; a fresh hope for the millions of Pakistanis who are facing the brunt of the economic and energy crisis confronted by the country today; a light at the end of the tunnel for the relatives of thousands of “missing persons” who have been made a scapegoat in the ‘war on terror’; and an insidious blow to the present government’s efforts to sweep the Judiciary issue under the carpet.

What this victory has brought home is the fact that the on-going struggle for the restoration of the superior judiciary that was unceremoniously removed from their offices on November 3 last year has not died down, as portrayed by some pro-government elements. On the contrary, it has, after a temporary hiatus – due to scorching heat, summer holidays, and the month of Ramzan -- re-invigorated itself, and from now on, it is only going to get stronger and stronger in the able leadership of Mr. Ali Ahmed Kurd. The massive turn out by the lawyers, members of the civil society, workers of the political parties and the traders at the weekly protest rallies, especially the one taken out on November 3 this year in Rawalpindi-Islamabad, besides the locking of the subordinate courts by the lawyers of the Lahore Bar Association followed by the registration of FIRs against the lawyers show that the movement is here to stay.

One may not disagree with the modus operandi of the Lahore Bar lawyers, but the fact of the matter is that it was after exhausting all the legal and moral options at their disposal that the lawyers took recourse to such an extreme measure. When 60 judges of the superior judiciary are sacked with just one stroke of the pen; when the members of the legal community are beaten, tortured and incarcerated merely for exercising their right to freedom of expression; when “promises are not ayaats and ahadith, but are just mere political statements”; and when an elected government is bent on giving indemnity to an usurper, it is naive to expect that the people would stick to the legal niceties any more and let others trample on their rights with impunity.

In this backdrop, the victory of Mr. Kurd is a silver lining. A perfect mixture of passion and prudence – with a higher tinge of passion depicted by his fiery speeches, he has all the ingredients not only to counter these sophistries, broken promises and double talks of cunning politicians, but also to steer the ship of the on-going movement to a successful culmination. Moreover, he does not carry with himself the stigma of being associated with any pro-government political party, as did his predecessor Aaitaz Ahsan.

This is not to doubt latter’s commitment to the cause, but the fact remains that he is a member of the central executive of PPPP, and is bound to be influenced by the policies of his party. To the cynics, his decision not to stage the ‘dharna’ was one of the examples of the influence his party wields over him. Having said that, we, the Pakistanis, are proud to have finally produced a leader of Aaitaz Ahsan’s standing, who, despite his all-too-human foibles, continues to be the torch bearer in this struggle for the establishment of rule of law, supremacy of the constitution and independence of judiciary in the country.

Nevertheless, the road ahead for Mr. Kurd, Aaitaz, Hamid Khan and other leaders of the legal fraternity is strewn with a lot of difficulties. The present political dispensation is adamant in its stance that the deposed judges have to take a fresh oath to be ‘re-instated’ to their offices. In the process, the government has, as per the terms and the conditions of the notorious deal, given indemnity to the November 3 actions of Mr. Musharraf. Lawyers’ stance, on the other hand, says that all those actions were extra-constitutional, and hence the judges need not take a fresh oath; only an executive order would suffice – a view endorsed by the majority of the legal minds in the country and worldwide.

At the critical juncture of Pakistan’s history when we are almost on the verge of default, with foreign exchange reserves fast depleting, one fails to fathom the total vacuity of government’s thinking as far as the judicial crisis is concerned. The PPPP-led government should, instead of lingering the issue, solve it forthwith, so that all the energies could be focused on other potent issues afflicting the country. No investor is willing to invest in Pakistan, given the prevailing uncertainty with in the judicial system of Pakistan, besides the deteriorating law and order situation compounded by the on-going ‘war on terror’ in the western borders of Pakistan. Shortage of energy, especially electricity, with the poor citizens facing 10 to 12-hour load-shedding a day, has further dampened the confidence of the rank and file in the ability of the incumbent government to deliver. Moreover, the long-awaited aid from the ‘Friends of Pakistan’ may not be forthcoming, and as a last resort, the economic moguls of the country will have to resort to IMF.

In short, Pakistan is in an economic and financial predicament, which can be solved to a large extent by the re-instatement of the ‘deposed’ judiciary, thereby not only restoring the confidence of investors into the justice system of Pakistan, but also improving the Law and order situation in the country. One hopes that the present government comes of age, and sheds it intransigence; otherwise, it will have to suffer the fate of the previous government and its mentor, Mr. Musharraf, whose removal from the office of president was made possible solely due to efforts of the lawyers’ community.

Dogar “greeted” by lawyers

FAISALABAD, March 9: Lawyers led by District Bar Association president Nasir Ali Gorraya staged a demonstration at Kamalpur Interchange when Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, who took oath under the Nov 3 Provisional Constitution Order, en route Multan via Jhang arrived here from Islamabad on Saturday.

Sources said that the chief justice was on his on way to Jhang when some protesting lawyers gathered at Kamalpur Interchange after coming to know the top judge’s travelling plan.

The protesters were carrying banners and black flags. They resorted to sloganeering in favour of deposed Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry the moment Justice Dogar’s vehicle left the motorway to enter the city precincts.

The lawyers vowed to continue their struggle till the reinstatement of all superior courts judges deposed under the Nov 3 PCO and for the establishment of rule of law, supremacy of the Constitution and independence of the judiciary.

Sudden and unannounced protest by the lawyers left protocol and security officials stunned and they immediately changed the CJP’s route towards Chiniot instead of Jhang to avert any further ‘eventuality’.

Lawyers’ drive reaching destination

LAHORE, March 9: Supreme Court’s deposed judge justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday said on Sunday the drive for the independence of judiciary, which began after the murder of judicial officer (SC) Hammad Raza, was nearing its end. SC additional registrar Hammad Raza was slain on May 14 in Islamabad.

Justice Ramday said this while talking to the participants of a car rally at his residence. The rally began from the residence of Supreme Court Bar Association president Aitzaz Ahsan’s residence in Zaman Park.

Hundreds of lawyers, activists, political workers and students attended the rally by the Concerned Citizens of Pakistan (CCP) to mark a ‘black flag week’ being observed to show solidarity with deposed judges.

Justice Ramday said the movement lawyers had launched on March 9, 2007, had added a golden chapter to the history books.

He said the people of Pakistan had stood up and made it clear to the rest of the world that they were a nation, alive and conscientious.

He said the lawyers' movement was not for the restoration of an individual but for the survival of national institutions. Mr Ramday was the head of a bench that was proceeding with a case regarding the candidature of President Pervez Musharraf in the presidential election at the time of imposition of emergency on Nov 3. Mr Ramday spoke high of Chief of Army Staff Pervez Kiyani, former SCBA presidents Munir A Malik and Justice (retd) Tariq Mahmood and Ali Ahmed Kurd and Mr Ahsan.

He paid tributes to Justice (retd) Mahmood, saying that he had sacrificed his job as the Balochistan High Court judge in 2002 when all other judges, including himself, were in hibernation at that time.

He said he had no words to express his feelings for lawyers, civil society and students for keeping the movement alive in face of hardships.

The protesters chanted slogans in favour of deposed judges and against President Mushrraf. They waved black flags and wore black armbands.

Some participants put stickers on cars carrying slogans for the reinstatement of judges. The rally arrived at Justice Ramday's residence via Canal Road and Jail Road.

As the rally reached the GOR-I, no law enforcement official stopped them from entering the area. The Lahore High Court has declared the GOR-I a 'no-go zone' for the common man.

Mr Ahsan also met Justice Ramday and had a chat with him for an hour. He congratulated the justice for his “likely restoration”.

Earlier, Bushra Aitzaz said everyone wanted the restoration of the judiciary sooner than later because it was in the best interest of the country.

She said when (deposed) Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was restored, activists would sing the national anthem outside the Supreme Court.

Hamid Zaman, Justice Nasira Iqbal (retired), Mansoor Ali Shah, Saima Khwaja, Muhammad Azhar Siddique and Beena Qureshi were present.

Restoration pledge must be met: warns aitzaz

LAHORE, March 9: Supreme Court Bar Association president Aitzaz Ahsan has expressed the hope that PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari and PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif will fulfil their promise to reinstate the deposed judges within 30 days after the formation of the new government.

Talking to reporters after meeting the Supreme Court’s deposed judge Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday at his residence here on Sunday, Mr Ahsan said people would start counting days for restoration of the judiciary and lawyers would continue their movement.

Earlier, addressing a press conference after hoisting a black flag at the office of the Punjab Bar Council to mark the beginning of the ‘black flag week,’ he said parliament would not be able to complete its five-year term if it set aside the reinstatement of the deposed judges. He said if the parliament did not restore the judges the lawyers would be forced to tell it that it needed a strong and independent judiciary to complete its tenure. He said a parliament built on the debris of the judiciary was destined to be weak and subservient.

He said the lawyers’ movement was aimed at strengthening national institutions, including parliament and the judiciary.

He said that only an independent and strong judiciary could guard parliament’s interests and serve as a bulwark against conspiracies.

He said that a judiciary aligned with President Pervez Musharraf could not hand down an independent decision.

He said the proponents of the theory that the illegal steps taken on Nov 3 last year could not be undone without a two-thirds majority in parliament were according legality to the actions taken by Gen (retd) Musharraf. That would mean that tomorrow another armyman would step in, suspend the Constitution, detain 100 judges instead of 60, arrest parliamentarians and tell the nation to go to parliament for a solution, he said.

Mr Ahsan accused the president of committing an offence by suspending and amending the Constitution and deposing and arresting 60 judges.

He said that on March 9 last year, the deposed chief justice was detained for four days but after the imposition of emergency he had been in illegal confinement for four months. “Not only the chief justice but his children also are incarcerated like prisoners. What wrong have Ifra, Palwasha and Bilal done?” he asked.

He said the chief justice’s home had been turned into a private jail.

In the judges’ colony in Islamabad, Justice Sardar Raza Khan, Justice Shakirullah Jan and Justice Nasirul Mulk were detained and in Lahore, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Falak Sher, Justice Tassadaq Hussain Jillani and Justice Ijaz Chaudhry were confined in their homes, he said.

He criticised the interior minister for stating the deposed chief justice had not been detained and that his official residence was to be vacated. Mr Ahsan said even a retired judge was allowed to keep the official residence for six months without any charges and was required to pay Rs 65,000 as rent in case he wanted to stay further.

“In this case we are talking about the chief justice of Pakistan. He is not deposed, he is the chief justice of Pakistan.”

He accused Gen (retd) Musharraf of keeping the chief justice confined in order to force him to resign. “Chief Justice Iftikhar will not resign,” Mr Ahsan said.

Aftermath of a proxy war!

Nauman Qaiser (Courtesy Dawn Letters)

VERY conscientious and concerned Pakistani would be alarmed at the recent increase in suicide bombings aimed at high government officials and personnel of law-enforcement agencies, wherein innocent civilians become unwilling victim.

This state of indiscriminate and wholesale brutality on the part of terrorists has made an ordinary citizen suspicious about the government’s will and ability to provide him security of person and property. In this regard, the government’s policies, specially those related to the so-called war on terror, have continuously been grilled by the intelligentsia.

Tuesday’s bomb blasts – which the authorities have hurriedly called a suicide attack — at the Pakistan Navy War College, Lahore; the successful suicide attack on the surgeon-general of the Pakistan Army; the carnage seen at the funeral of a deputy superintendent of police, who himself was a victim of one such attack; the gruesome butchery of the policemen deployed to ‘guard’ the lawyers’ rally in Lahore; and several other gory incidents of the similar nature testify to the fact that the so-called war on terror being fought by Pakistan has become increasingly unpopular, especially in the Frontier region, which ‘hosts’ this war, and from where most of these suicide bombers purportedly hail.

The government may be hinting at the involvement of a foreign hand with particular reference to India, but all evidence, empirical as well as nominal, support the theory that the terrorism being faced by Pakistan is home-grown. Besides rampant poverty and illiteracy, it’s the desperation after a dear one is brutally killed by a ‘brother’ soldier that forces these suicide bombers to indiscriminately blow up the fellow citizens.

Had President Musharraf declined to join this war, Pakistan would not have been facing such macabre consequences which threaten to tear its very fabric apart. In any case, the threat to “bomb Pakistan to the Stone Age”, which was only meant to bring Pakistan into compliance, would definitely not have materialised, given, inter alia, the nuclear deterrence we possess.

However, what the Americans would have found difficult to achieve, the unabated suicidal bombings and the resulting lawlessness, which are direct the consequence of the war we are fighting for the Americans, would definitely be able to accomplish. That is to say that if necessary measures are not taken forthwith to curtail these terrorist acts, Pakistan would definitely be going towards bombing itself to the ‘Stone Age’. The government, therefore, should reconsider its role in the ‘war on terror’, in which Pakistan’s services have not even been acknowledged as day in and day out our ‘allies’ in the West repeat the mantra of ‘to do more’. The only solution to the current crisis is pulling the Army out of the estranged Frontier regions, without which the so-far unsuccessful political dialogue is not possible.

I do not buy the idea of trying both the stick and the carrot at the same time; to try the carrots one must put the stick in the cupboard.

In this ‘fight’ between the terrorists and the government, an ordinary citizen of Pakistan is the victim. Like the political uncertainty surrounding the country for the last one or so year, this continuing sense of insecurity along with the lack of availability of basic amenities of life brought the patience of the masses to the brim, as they gave their verdict in the general election against the Musharraf regime.

Now the ball is in the court of the new government, which should better take cognizance of the aspiration of the ordinary citizens or else be prepared to be consigned to the dustbin of history.

US urged to support Pakistani lawyers

WASHINGTON, March 2: America’s largest legal fraternity — the National Lawyers Guild — has invited several high-ranking lawyers from Pakistan to tour the United States.

The lawyers will visit major cities and explain their effort to restore the judges dismissed by President Pervez Musharraf.

American lawyers associated with the guild will also address these meetings and urge the US administration to change its policy of “blindly trusting” President Musharraf as an ally in the war on terror despite his administration’s efforts to deprive the judiciary of its independence and to impose restrictions on the press.

Attorney Ryan Hancock, the vice-president of NLG’s mid-Atlantic region, said the centrepiece of the tour will be NLG’s mid-Atlantic regional conference in Philadelphia this week at the Drexel University College of Law.

The closing session of the conference is titled “Rule of Law and Pakistan’s Lawyers’ Movement: Then and Now” and will feature three leaders of the movement, Hamid Khan, Muneer Malik and Sahibzada Anwar Hamid.

An NLG delegation of four lawyers and four law students visited Pakistan for 11 days in January and recently issued a report that called for a “major change in US policy, away from support for military dictatorship and towards support of genuine democracy and rule of law in Pakistan.”

An independent judiciary “is fundamental to a free society,” the report says, and the NLG delegation “has concluded that any outcome short of restoring the judges serving on November 2, 2007 will have long-term negative impacts on the rule of law in Pakistan by subjecting the judiciary — and therefore the entire government and the country’s 160 million people — to the whim of the executive.”

In NLG’s trip to Pakistan, Mr Hancock said, members of the delegation travelled to all of the major cities where they conducted interviews with more than 50 jurists, lawyers, political party representatives, elected officials, civil servants, journalists and members of civil society.

Lawmakers asked to reinstate judges or meet same fate

LAHORE, March 2: Supreme Court Bar Association president Aitzaz Ahsan warned parliamentarians on Sunday that if they did not reinstate the deposed judges, they themselves could meet the same fate one day.

He was addressing people who gathered outside his Zaman Park residence after his four-month detention ended after the last restraining order issued by the Punjab government had lapsed.

“We don’t buy the idea that someone could suspend parliament, arrest the parliamentarians, amend the Constitution and say now go to parliament for a solution,” Mr Ahsan said.

He said that proponents of the theory that the illegal steps taken on Nov 3 could not be reversed without parliament were, in fact, justifying the illegality.

“They are trying to mislead parliament for which we want to ensure a full tenure,” Mr Ahsan added.

“Don’t blame us if the parliament failed to restore the judges and the parliamentarians got arrested tomorrow. I am sure nobody would raise a voice.”

He said his message was: “Give the people their judges back.”

He said all the deposed judges could resume work if the interior minister issued an order.

He said that the deposed chief justice, Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, was still confined to his residence along with his school-going children. “Mohtarma Shaheed Benazir Bhutto, while standing in front of the barbed residence of the chief justice on Dec 10, had stated that Iftikhar Chaudhry was still the Chief Justice of Pakistan,” he recalled and said that the late prime minister wanted to launch a long march but was detained.

He said the lawyers laid stress on the long march because they wanted restoration of the pre-November 3 emergency to strengthen parliament.

“If anyone is to be weakened by the long march, it would be Gen Musharraf and his aides who need a compliant judiciary,” the SCBA chief said.

He said the lawyers wanted parliament to restore the judiciary and the Constitution and to give complete freedom of expression to the media.

He said if parliament failed to fulfil the demand, the lawyers would issue a fresh date for the long march.

He said if the lawyers needed to execute their plan for the march, not only the deposed but retired judges also would accompany them to Islamabad. The lawyers would converge from all directions and gather in Islamabad to free the deposed chief justice and all other judges.

Mr Ahsan said the lawyers would observe a black week from March 9, the date on which the chief justice was first detained last year, hoist black flags and hold conventions. He asked students to come forward and participate in the campaign for the restoration of judges.

He said he would go to Naudero on Monday to visit Ms Bhutto’s grave. Answering a question, Mr Ahsan said he had supported Makhdoom Amin Fahim’s name for the prime minister’s post but would go along with the party’s decision in this regard.

Later, he marched to The Mall, along with lawyers, activists, students and workers of the PPP and PTI.

Aitazaz released from house arrest!

The Chief antagonist amongst the lawyer’s movement that spearheaded opposition to President Pervez Musharraf was released on Sunday after four months of detention and house arrest, a senior government official said.

Aitzaz Ahsan, a former Member of Parliament and cabinet minister, was detained hours after Musharraf imposed emergency rule on the country on Nov. 3 last year. His staunch support of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who was purged when Musharraf imposed emergency rule, along with dozens of other judges seen seen as hostile to Musharraf’s re-election in October while still army chief.

“His detention is over. He’s now free man. There’s no need to issue any release order,” Khusro Pervaiz Khan, home secretary of provincial Punjab government, told Reuters. Reports state that barricades outside Ahsan’s house in Lahore, have been removed and police withdrawn.

Ahsan, president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, was held at Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi for nearly three weeks before being put under house arrest in Lahore.He vowed on Sunday to continue a campaign by lawyers to press for the restoration of the sacked judges.“We’ll continue our fight. We believe there’s no independent judiciary until all detained judges are released and restored,” he said. ­

What Justice Khawaja Sharif has to say...

Justice Sharif tells lawyers to jealously guard reinstatements

Justice Khawaja Mohammad Sharif of the Lahore High Court (LHC), who did not succumb to the allegiance of the Nov 3 Provisional Constitution Order (PCO), has urged lawyers to remain vigilant for their cause of independence of the judiciary, particularly the reinstatement of all judges deposed under the PCO.

Though political parties had pledged to ensure supremacy and independence of the judiciary and reinstate all superior courts judges, it was bars’ duty to remain united and committed to their cause for the establishment of rule of law, supremacy of the Constitution and independence of the judiciary, Justice Sharif told members of the District Bar Association (DBA) here on Thursday.

Justice Sharif, who was senior-most LHC judge after chief justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry and was due to be elevated as chief justice on Jan 1, narrated the sordid tale how he was pressed by the regime through his own kith and kin to stay away from the lawyers’ movement for independence of the judiciary, especially to abandon attending a reception hosted by Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) in honour of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry on LHCBA premises on May 5, 2007.

Around 18 judges led by the senior-most judge, Justice Sharif, attended the overnight reception that could only start next morning upon the arrival of chief justice of Pakistan on May 6. The reception had given true impetus to the lawyers’ struggle after Chief Justice Iftikhar had been sent on forced leave in the wake of a presidential reference filed on March 9, and had indeed ‘annoyed’ many at the helm of affairs.

Speaking to a jam-packed audience at the DBA Hall, Justice Sharif said the legal fraternity’s struggle was going on uninterrupted yet undeterred, as they wanted new generations must benefit from the establishment of rule of law in the country. He said the masses had appreciated and indeed participated in lawyers’ protest drive vigorously, which proved that people joined hands with forces struggling for democracy and supremacy of the Constitution.

"It was the lawyers’ relentless effort which forced President Musharraf to shed his army uniform,” Justice Sharif added.

Lawyers resorted to full-throated slogans in favour of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and other superior courts judges who did not took oath under the Nov 3, 2007 edition of the PCO.

Justice Sharif said Musharraf’s regime had been claiming that it had brought tremendous prosperity in the country but ground realities were depicting an altogether different situation as masses had been running from pillar to post for bread and flour and had been confronted with power and gas outages in extreme winter. He also termed February 18 a day of “silent revolution” in the country.

He praised Justice Rana Bagwandas (retired) as he was first judge of the superior judiciary who straightforwardly refused to surrender to the PCO’s loyalty.

Justice Sharif said his close relatives were influenced by the regime to advise him to refrain from supporting Chief Justice Iftikhar and the lawyers’ movement.

He said a governor of a province also tried to ‘persuade’ him to stay away from the LHCBA’s May 5 reception but he did not budge to the temptations and continued supporting the unprecedented movement despite his due elevation as LHC chief justice on Jan 1 upon the retirement of the then chief justice, Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry.

Later, the DBA members took out a protest rally. Holding banners and placards, lawyers marched on different city roads and later dispersed after returning to the bar premises. Throughout their journey, they kept on shouting high-pitched slogans, prominently their favourite rhetoric, “Go Musharraf go” and “Chief (Justice Iktikhar) Tere Jan Nisar — Beshumar, beshumar.”

PML-N’s another pledge with judiciary

LAHORE, Feb 28: A meeting of Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) women elected to reserved seats of national and provincial assemblies on Thursday took oath that they would work for the restoration of the pre-emergency judiciary.

The meeting was chaired by PML-N Patron Nawaz Sharif. Party president Shahbaz Sharif, Begum Kulsoom Nawaz and Senator Ishaq Dar were also present.

Lawyers' movement march......What's happening across the country... Punjab

Lawyers’ Rally today

LAHORE, Feb 28: Lawyers of the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) and the Lahore Bar Association (LBA) will stage a rally and observe a full boycott of courts on Friday (today).

The leadership of both organisations decided to stage a protest against government policies regarding detention of Supreme Court Bar Association President Aitzaz Ahsan and Ali Ahmad Kurd, as well as the dismissal of judges of superior courts on Nov 3.

Sources said the rally, to start from Aiwan-i-Adl by the LBA at 11am, will be joined by LHCBA lawyers at Lahore High Court Crossing and will march towards Punjab Assembly Hall.

The rally was scheduled to be held on Thursday, but was rescheduled due to the Urs of Data Sahib.

The meetings of the general houses of both the LHCBA and the LBA will also be held at 10:30am, while lawyers will observe a full day strike and not appear in the courts. — APP

Lawyers' movement march......What's happening across the country... Sindh

Lawyers advise leaders not to act out of expediency
Dawn Report

HYDERABAD, Feb 28: Lawyers advised the political leadership during complete boycott of courts on Thursday not to fall back on political expediency and use the time given to them to reinstate the deposed judges and restore constitution to its pre-Oct 12, 1999 status.

They observed complete boycott of courts in different parts of the province in response to a call given by Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to step pressure for the reinstatement of judges.

In Hyderabad lawyers did not appear in civil and sessions courts. They wore black armbands and held a general body meeting in civil courts building.

Former president of Hyderabad District Bar Association (HDBA) Chaudhry Bashir Gujjar hoisted black flag on the bar room and vice-president of HDBA Abdul Khaliq Leghari, vice-president of High Court Bar Association (HCBA) Hyderabad Abdul Rehman Sheikh, joint secretary of HCBA Ayaz Hussain Tunio, Sultan Sheikh, Nisar Durrani and Mukhtar Khanzada condemned government action after promulgation of emergency and demanded immediate reinstatement of judges.

They said that the long march scheduled for March 9 had been postponed and not cancelled because the bar leadership wanted to give the newly-elected government some time.

They said that they were closely watching how the politicians would deal with the issue of judges. If sacked judges were not reinstated then lawyers would stage long march as planned and also take other legal steps to achieve their objectives, they warned.

Possible solutions to pending crisis...What Asma Jehangir has to say...

Prominent lawyer Asma Jehangir, who is also chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, says the deposed judges can be reinstated if the Provisional Constitution Order enforced on Nov 3 is presented before the new parliament and it rejects the document which served as the law of the land during the weeks the 1973 Constitution remained in abeyance.

Such a step will not only annul all that President Musharraf had done during the emergency but will also bring back to courtrooms all five dozen judges who lost their jobs after the extra-constitutional measure taken by the general, she said while talking to Dawn on Tuesday.

She said the restored judges should take a decision on the fate of those who had taken oath under the PCO or who had been appointed after Nov 3, 2007. She proposed that the apex court should give a comprehensive judgment on the subject to address all aspects of the matter.

Ms Jehangir said she would advise the political parties to adopt the best possible mechanism so that the dignity of courts was upheld. Seeking reinstatement of all deposed judges, she said the matter should not be kept pending for any reason.

Sources close to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif say that PML-N leadership is of the view that a "resolution" passed by a simple majority of parliament could restore the pre-Nov 3 judiciary.

The sources said if the parliament resolution said that certain things done during the emergency rule were not valid under the Constitution, President Musharraf would come under obligation to have such things endorsed by a two-thirds majority of the two houses to keep them valid.

They said since it would not be possible for the president to have a two-thirds majority on his side, the resolution of the parliament would hold the field.

Journey of Judicial Bus..on way to Mirpurkhas

The arrival of the ‘judicial bus’ in Mirpurkhas on March 1 has been postponed and now the judicial bus will arrive here on 22.

Mirpurkhas District Bar Association president Salahuddin Panhwar told journalists here on Wednesday that the judicial bus -- carrying deposed judges of the Sindh High Court, senior lawyers and office-bearers of different bar associations ---would reach Mirpurkhas on March 22 at 1pm.

They would be accorded warm welcome at Jamrao Canal bridge, he added.

The deposed judges, senior lawyers and office-bearers of bar associations were coming to Mirpurkhas to attend oath taking ceremony of newly elected office-bearers of the Mirpurkhas DBA, Mr Panhwar said.

Last week they had undertaken a similar journey to Hyderabad.

The newly-elected office-bearers of Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas bar associations have refused to be administered oath by the chief justice of Sindh High Court on the ground that he has taken oath under the controversial Provisional Constitution Order. They have preferred deposed chief justice of Sindh High Court, Justice Sabihuddin, for the task because he refused to take oath under the PCO.

Islamabad lawyers are on strike!!

Islamabad lawyers observe strike
Thursday, February 28, 2008
ISLAMABAD: The lawyers observed strike in Rawalpindi and Islamabad courts on Thursday to stress for restoration of deposed judges.

The lawyers of the twin cities stayed away from the courts proceedings on Pakistan Bar Council’s strike call.

The lawyers bodies holding protest meetings throughout the country to demand reinstatement of the sacked judges.

Any silver linning for lawyers from PPPP, PML-N and ANP power of show?

Coalition upbeat over judges issue

ISLAMABAD, Feb 27: Top constitutional expert Fakhruddin G. Ibrahim on Wednesday briefed a high-level meeting of three likely partners in the future coalition government, suggesting modalities to resolve the judicial crisis through the new parliament and left the participants upbeat about the restoration of the deposed judges.

“The country will soon hear good news as we are very hopeful that the crisis will be resolved amicably,” a participant told Dawn on condition of anonymity.

The over 90-minute meeting was held in a hotel after the conclusion of the ‘show of strength’ gathering hosted by Asif Ali Zardari.

The mainstream political parties are seeking assistance of a number of senior legal experts on the two-fold judicial crisis -- how to reinstate the deposed judges who were removed after the proclamation of the November 3 emergency and what may become of the present judges who took oath under the PCO, but later took a fresh oath under the Constitution after the lifting of the state of emergency.

Renowned human right activists and constitutional expert Asma Jehangir has already met Mr Zardari in this regard.

Mr Ibrahim, who commands respect for his independent views on important national issues, was especially flown in from Karachi to help the Pakistan People’s Party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Awami National Party to find a viable solution.

The PPP was represented by Mr Zardari, Amin Fahim, Raza Rabbani, Farooq Naek and Sardar Latif Khosa. Nawaz Sharif was assisted by Shahbaz Sharif, Khawaja Asif and Ishaq Dar. Asfandyar Wali was alone from the ANP side.

“Basically we have discussed the modalities on how to handle the prevailing crisis through parliament so that there could be minimum of pit holes,” the participant said.

“Our focus during the discussion was on how to restore the judiciary and we are hopeful that the issue would be resolved through parliament soon,” he said.

Another source privy to the meeting said that the effect of removing a large number of superior court judges could be nullified through a simple law by parliament since President Pervez Musharraf had already accepted that his action was extra-constitutional.

The simple law could also take care of the recent judgment of validating the November 3 emergency by the Supreme Court which had also declared the cases of deposed judges as past and closed transaction.

A petition could also be filed in the apex court on the issue since no detailed arguments took place regarding the judge’s issue.

Though having no legal binding, a resolution both by the National Assembly and the Senate could be adopted, he said.

Munir A Malik...Is roll back of lawyers movement possible?

No chance for lawyers’ movement to roll back: Munir


RAWALPINDI: Former president, Supreme Court Bar Association, Munir A. Malik Wednesday said lawyers will not accept any other settlement besides restoration of deposed judges.

Addressing the Rawalpindi High Court Bar, he attributed the success of democratic forces in the recent general elections to the struggle launched by the lawyers. Therefore, he said, if a political party does not want full restoration of the judges it does not deserve to be called a democratic party.

Munir Malik said no one should remain under the illusion that lawyers will back down from the stance. “They will keep their struggle on until the full restoration of the deposed judges,” he added.

He hoped that Aitezaz Ahsan and Ali Ahmed Kurd will also be released from detention just like Tariq Mehmood.

“The lawyers are completely united,” Munir Malik said.

Legal analysis of the Judicial crisis!

Nauman Qaiser

In the wake of the extra-constitutional steps taken by the then Chief of the Army Staff on November 3, 2007, the Chief Justice of Pakistan and about sixty of other Judges of the superior judiciary were deposed unceremoniously. Thereafter the superior Courts were stuffed with handpicked Judges, who wasted no time in ‘validating’ these illegal and unconstitutional measures.

Subsequently, the legal community in particular and the civil society in general rejected the said unconstitutional measures out rightly and started agitating against the same ever since. On February 18, 2008 the people of Pakistan have also resoundingly spoken and given their verdict against the unconstitutional assault upon the independence of judiciary in the country. There is now a virtual consensus and a universal demand in the country that the affected Judges ought to be restored to their offices forthwith. The present article looks at the validity of the relevant legislative measures and steps, legitimacy of the purported upholding and validation of such measures and steps by the post-November 3, 2007 Supreme Court and constitutional status of the current and deposed Chief Justices and Judges besides suggesting ways and means required for restoration of the affected Chief Justices and Judges to their offices.

The following questions appear to be of critical importance in the context of the prevalent judicial crisis and clear and categorical answers to the same may lead to a satisfactory end to the constitutional impasse in that regard:

Question No. (i): What is the constitutional and legal status of the legislative measures and steps taken by the then Chief of the Army Staff and the incumbent President of Pakistan on November 3, 2007?

Firstly, the steps taken on November 3, 2007 were not duly authorized by any law in force in Pakistan on that day including the Constitution and were, therefore, void ab-initio. It is an established law that something which is void is to be ignored as it did not exist at all, and no formal setting aside through any judicial or legislative process is needed for it. As far as the right to proclaim emergency is concerned, as envisaged by part- x of the Constitution, it only vests in the president of Pakistan, and no one else including the Chief of Army Staff possesses this authority. Therefore, the mere fact that the November 3 “emergency” was proclaimed by the then Chief of Army Staff, not the president –though both posts were held by one individual at that time – makes all the post-November 3 ‘legislative’ measures void and unconstitutional.

Secondly, by virtue of clause (2) of Article 4 of the Constitution, which gives every citizen of Pakistan a right to be dealt with in accordance of law, no serving Chief Justice or Judge could be prevented from or be hindered in performance of his duties and functions or be compelled or required to take a fresh oath of his office on the basis of such self-styled legislative measures. A Chief Justice or a Judge of the superior judiciary can be removed from his office only through the due process provided for by Article 209 of the Constitution and any other method adopted for the purpose is to be treated as unconstitutional, invalid, ineffective and void.

Thirdly, it is an undeniable fact that soon after issuance of the Proclamation of Emergency, promulgation of the Provisional Constitution Order and introduction of the Oath of Office (Judges) Order on November 3, 2007 a seven member Bench of the serving and constitutionally appointed Judges of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, had passed a restraining order against the said purported legislative measures and, thus, the said measures could not legitimately take any legal effect. Any superstructure subsequently built upon or any step taken on the basis of such illegitimate and unlawful measures was, therefore, non-existent in the eyes of the law.

Lastly, every extra-constitutional measure or step necessarily requires validation of the same by the citizens of the country represented through the Parliament. A social contract between the people and the State cannot unilaterally be amended or modified by a ruler without the consent or approval of the people. This is why in the past every amendment of the Constitution by an unrepresentative government had to be put up before the Parliament at the earliest opportunity for the purpose of its validation by the representatives of the people. The legislative measures introduced and the steps taken on November 3, 2007 as well as the amendments made in the Constitution on the basis of the same have, thus, no legitimacy or validity till they are validated by the Parliament. The argument that the constitutional amendments introduced at the time of lifting of the Proclamation of Emergency and the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 require invalidation and not validation by the Parliament is fallacious on the face of it and the same not only reflects lack of prudence but it also demonstrates lack of understanding of jurisprudence on the part of those advancing the argument.

Question No. (ii): What is the validity of the pronouncements made by the post-November 3, 2007 Supreme Court on the relevant issues?

Firstly, the post-November 3, 2007 Supreme Court pronouncing upon validity of the purported legislative measures of November 3, 2007 was an unconstitutionally constituted body. Upholding of some void legislative measures by an unconstitutionally constituted body compounds the void nature of the whole exercise. Like the void nature of the purported legislative measures the pronouncements upholding and validating them were also void and, thus, liable to be ignored as nullity.

Secondly, the eight member Bench of the post-November 3, 2007 Supreme Court upholding and ‘validating’ the purported legislative measures of November 3, 2007 was presided over by a ‘Chief Justice’ and was manned by seven other ‘Judges’ who had assumed those offices as a direct consequence of the legislative measures which were under challenge before them. Apart from that all eight of them had already made an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Proclamation of Emergency and the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 and, thus, on account of their undeniable personal interest and apparent bias they all stood disqualified to hear and decide challenges made against the said purported legislative measures. It goes without saying that pronouncements by such ‘Judges’ on issues they were inherently disqualified to adjudicate upon hardly commend themselves for acceptance or favourable reception. Subsequent dismissal of some review applications against such pronouncements by even larger Benches of the same ‘Court’ were equally denuded of any legitimacy or validity as all the ‘Judges’ deciding such review applications had been appointed to the Supreme Court without the mandatory consultation with the validly and constitutionally appointed Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Thirdly, even if, for the sake of argument, the relevant pronouncements by the post-November 3, 2007 Supreme Court are accepted as valid and lawful still it is established law that the Parliament can declare a judicial pronouncement to be ineffective and inoperative through a simple majority.

Lastly, through a judicial pronouncement regarding an extra-constitutional measure or step, the judiciary can only acknowledge the de facto nature of the measure or step for the purposes of continuity of the business of the State but it cannot arrogate to itself the power of conferring validity upon the measure or step which power rests only with the Parliament. A court can never claim to be a representative of the people who only have the choice of accepting or rejecting a change in or a deviation from the social contract, i.e. the Constitution.

Question No. (iii): What is the status of the serving Judges of the Supreme Court and the serving Chief Justices and Judges of the High Courts who had taken oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007?

All the Judges who were already in service on November 3, 2007 and who had taken oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 had clearly and deliberately violated their original oath under the Constitution whereby they had sworn before Almighty Allah that they would ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the Constitution. By taking oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 they had demonstrated that instead of preserving and defending the Constitution they were more interested in protecting their own jobs. It is the primary duty of a Judge of the superior judiciary to protect the citizens’ rights but by taking oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 such Judges had chosen to become partners of those who were out to rob the citizens of their constitutional rights. The cases of such Chief Justices and Judges are, therefore, fit cases for reference to the Supreme Judicial Council for their removal from office on account of their demonstrated betrayal of the Constitution and deliberate violation of their oath of office.

Further, such Judges should be tried for high treason under article 6 of the Constitution, for they have assisted in ‘validating’ the unconstitutional acts of military dictator.

Moreover, in their zeal to cling on to their jobs such Judges did not hesitate to stab their own judiciary in the back. They not only ignored their own oath and commitment made before Almighty Allah but also, violated the order passed by a seven member Bench of the legitimate Supreme Court on November 3, 2007 restraining all the Judges of the superior judiciary from taking oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007. Such misconduct on their part again renders them liable to be proceeded against before the Supreme Judicial Council.

It is about time that the judiciary should be cleansed of such Judges who had demonstrated by their conduct that their jobs and the perks and privileges carried by their jobs were closer to their hearts than the Constitution and the people’s rights there under. Such Judges are no more than pretenders and are inherently unfit and unsuited for the onerous duties they are required to perform. They are, therefore, to be shown the door unceremoniously so as to set an example for the posterity.

Question No. (iv): What is the status of the Chief Justices and Judges appointed during and after the subsistence of the Proclamation of Emergency and the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007?

The judges of the superior Courts appointed during and after the subsistence of the Proclamation of Emergency and the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 had been appointed without the mandatory consultation with the validly and constitutionally appointed Chief Justice of Pakistan and validly and constitutionally appointed Chief Justices of High Courts in terms of Articles 177(1) and 193 (1)(c) of the Constitution. Therefore, in the eyes of the Constitution, the ‘Chief Justices’ consulted for appointment of such ‘Chief Justices’ and ‘Judges’ were no more than pretenders. All such appointments were, therefore, void and a nullity and can be ignored, needing no formal setting aside.

Restraining such Chief Justices and Judges from performance of the duties and functions of the relevant offices does not involve any action by the Supreme Judicial Council under Article 209 of the Constitution because Article 209 is attracted to a case of ‘removal’ of a validly appointed Chief Justice and Judge and not to the case of restraining a pretender from performing the duties and functions of the office. All such Chief Justices and Judges can simply be denotified.

Question No. (v): What is the status of the Chief Justices and Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts who did not take oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007?

The purported legislative measures taken by the then Chief of the Army Staff and the incumbent President of Pakistan on November 3, 2007 did not qualify as ‘law’ under the Constitution and, thus, by virtue of clause (2) of Article 4 of the Constitution no serving Chief Justice or Judge could be prevented from or be hindered in performance of his duties and functions or be compelled or required to take a fresh oath of his office on the basis of such self-styled legislative measures.

The affected Chief Justices and Judges could have been removed from their offices only in accordance with the provisions of Article 209 of the Constitution and, thus, in the eyes of the Constitution the Chief Justices and Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts who did not take oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of 2007 are still Chief Justices and Judges and restraining them from performing the duties and functions of their offices was and continues to be unconstitutional, void, nullity and ineffective.

Question No. (vi): How can the affected Chief Justices and Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts recommence performance of their duties and functions?

As already mentioned, the so-called legislative measures and steps taken by the then Chief of the Army Staff on November 3, 2007 were absolutely unconstitutional and void, so formal setting aside through any judicial or legislative is not at all needed. Therefore, given the political will supported by the popular aspiration, the affected Chief Justices and Judges can be encouraged and supported to recommence performance of their duties and functions without further ado.

Treating the purported legislative measures of November 3, 2007 as void does not attract the provisions of Article 264 of the Constitution providing for the ‘Effects of repeal of laws’ and specifying that repeal of a law does not revive the earlier position. It goes without saying that no repealing is involved in the process of identifying and recognizing a nullity. Revival and restoration of the original positions of the affected Chief Justices and Judges merely require a symbolic recognition and acceptance of their continuance in service and not repealing of the void offending measures of November 3, 2007. If needed, such recognition and acceptance of their continuance in service can be demonstrated simply by withdrawing the Notification through which the affected Chief Justices and Judges had purportedly been denotified.

Even if the purported legislative measures of November 3, 2007 are assumed to be valid still they can, at best, be equated with legislation by the Federal Executive under Article 89 of the Constitution and the spirit of clause (2) of Article 89 of the Constitution makes it evident that the operation and effect of a legislative instrument introduced by the Federal Executive can be terminated or neutralized by the National Assembly through a simple resolution disapproving it.

The affected Chief Justices and Judges had been restrained from performance of their duties and functions through use of brute force sans any constitutionality or legality and subsequent vanishing of the coercive apparatus has automatically removed the earlier restraints and inhibitions. The affected Chief Justices and Judges can, therefore, recommence performance of their duties and functions with some assistance from the Executive which can facilitate them in physical reoccupation of their chambers, courtrooms, court offices and court premises. If push comes to shove then the perpetrators and their abettors can be administered the taste of their own medicine!