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!

Results of LHCBA elections!

Anwar Kamal advocate, supported by Supreme Court Bar Association president Aitzaz Ahsan and the Professional Group, won the presidential slot of the Lahore High Court Bar Association in an election linked mainly to the lawyers’ movement for the restoration of the deposed judges.

Mr Kamal bagged 3504 votes and defeated his main rival Pakistan Bar Council member Pervez Inayat Malik, who secured 1068 votes. The Khosa Group, headed by Senator Sardar Latif Khosa, backed Mr Malik.

Mian Muhammad Aslam advocate clinched the vice president’s slot by getting 1575 votes. The rest of the candidates were Babar A Khilji who got 1003 votes, Chaudhry Zafar Iqbal 966 votes and Mian Jamil Akhter 989 votes.

For the secretary’s slot, Rana Asadullah Khan took lead over rest of the candidates by bagging 1846 votes. His rivals Nasir Hussain Malik polled 946 votes, Zahid Hussain Malik 946 votes, Sahir Mahmood Bhatti 714 votes, Mian Irfan Akram 553 votes and Wasim Mumtaz Malik 519 votes.

Syeda Feroza Rubab bagged 1802 votes to become the finance secretary

Polling underway in Lahore High Court Bar elections

LAHORE: The annual election of Lahore High Court Bar is underway on Saturday. The voting which begun at 9:00 am would continue till 5:00 pm. At least ten thousand lawyers are exercising their right of vote. Fifteen candidates are taking part in these elections.

Anwar Kamal supported by Professional Group, Pervez Inayat Malik supported by Sardar Latif Khan Khosa group and Moazzam Iqbal contesting for president ship.

For vice president, four candidates, for secretary five and for secretary finance three candidates including two women are contesting elections.

Letter of The commonwealth judicial education institute to Justice Iftikhar

The Honourable Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry

Dear Chief Justice Chaudhry,

I have been very distressed at my inability to get through to you since the beginning of the Pakistan judicial crisis. We have been able to contact Justice Jillani, Justice Rabbani, Justice Khosa and Justice Alam and I hope you may know from one of them of our attempts to be supportive and helpful to you.

I was only today put in touch with Athar Minallah and it is through his kindness that I am able to send this message.

In addition to our other efforts to influence the restoration of the proper judiciary of Pakistan, we have created a special Award of Honour for you and your colleagues who so nobly and unselfishly exhibited great judicial valour in upholding the Constitution. We have also prepared a small leaflet on our perception of the damage to democracy done by your and your colleagues’ removal from the Bench and we are planning to circulate that to all the members of the new Parliament next week along with an appeal for them to restore the judiciary. We also will give notification of our Award of Honour to you and the respect in which you are held internationally.

Please let me know of anything else we can do to be of support.

We are very happy that you and your family are well. Please give my warmest best wishes to your wife. You have both endured so much.

Sincerely,

Sandra E. Oxner

Imran and Aitzaz are advising newly elected members of Parliment...what they say...read on!!

موقع نہ جانے دیں: اعتزاز، عمران

عبادالحق بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، لاہور

تحریک انصاف کے سربراہ عمران خان نے سپریم کورٹ بار ایسوسی ایشن کےصدر اعتزاز احسن سے ملاقات کی اور دونوں رہنماؤں نے ایک مشترکہ پریس کانفرنس میں اس بات پر زور دیا ہے کہ عدلیہ کی بحالی پارلیمنٹ کی سب سے پہلی ترجیحی ہونی چاہیئے۔

جمعہ کو تحریک انصاف کے سربراہ عمران خان، پیپلز پارٹی کے رہنما اور سپریم کورٹ بار کے صدر اعتزاز احسن سے ملاقات کے لیے ان کی رہائش گاہ پرگئے۔

دونوں رہنماؤں نے ملاقات میں عدلیہ کی بحالی کے بارے میں تبادلہ خیال کیا۔ ملاقات میں سپریم کورٹ بار ایسوسی ایشن کےسابق صدر حامد خان بھی موجود تھے۔

ملاقات کے بعد مشترکہ پریس کانفرنس میں عمران خان نے کہا کہ اگر سیاسی جماعتوں نے’پبلک مینڈیٹ‘ کا فائدہ نہ اٹھایا اور صدر مشرف کے خلاف ٹھوس موقف اختیار نہ کیا تو یہی جماعتیں آئندہ چھ ماہ کے اندر پچھتائیں گی اور ایک سنہری موقع کھو دیں گی۔

اگر پارلیمنٹ عدلیہ کو بحال نہیں کرتی تو وہ پارلیمان بےمغی ہوجائے گی اعتزاز احسن

ان کا کہنا تھا’حکومت سازی کا عمل چل رہا ہے اور نئے ارکان اسمبلی کو موقع دیں گے لیکن اس عدلیہ کی بحالی کے موقف پر کوئی سمجھوتہ نہیں کریں گے۔

عمران خان کے مطابق اگر نئی پارلیمان عدلیہ کو بحال نہیں کرتی اور آئین کے پیچھے چھپے گی اور بہانے تلاش کریں گے تو پاکستانی قوم اس کو تسلیم نہیں کرے گی۔

اعتزاز احسن نے کہا کہ صدر مشرف کو انتخابات میں شکست ہوئی ہے اور عوام نے صدر مشرف کی ساٹھ ججوں کو برطرف اور گرفتار کرنے کی پالیسی کو مسترد کر دیا ہے۔

اگر سیاسی جماعتوں نے’پبلک مینڈیٹ‘ کا فائدہ نہ اٹھایا تو یہی جماعتیں آئندہ چھ ماہ کے اندر پچھتائیں گی اور ایک سنہری موقع کھو دیں گی عمران خان

اگر پارلیمنٹ عدلیہ کو بحال نہیں کرتی تو وہ پارلیمان بےمغی ہوجائے گی۔ان کے بقول اگر پارلیمنٹ نے عدلیہ کو بحال نہ کیا تو اس پارلیمنٹ کے وجود میں آنے کے ایک ہفتے کے اندر اندر سیاست کا مرکز ثقل پارلیمنٹ نہیں بلکہ سڑکوں پر ہوگا۔

اعتزاز احسن کا کہنا ہے کہ آصف زرداری اور نواز شریف کی ملاقات میں یہ خوش آئندہ بات ہے کہ دونوں رہنماؤں نےاصولی اتفاق کیا ہے کہ جج بحال ہوجائیں گے لیکن اب تک مکمل طور پر مطمن نہیں ہیں۔

ان کے بقول ملاقات کے بعد یہ اعلان ہونا چاہئے تھا کہ پارلیمان کی مداخلت کے بغیر جج بحال کیے جا سکتے ہیں۔ان کے بقول عدلیہ کی بحالی کا طریقۂ کار ہے کہ معزول ججوں کے راستوں سے رکاوٹیں ختم کر دی جائیں اور اس کے لیے پارلیمان کی مداخلت کی ضرورت نہیں ہے۔

اعتزاز احسن نے کہا کہ وکلاء کا کراچی سے خیبر تک مارچ کا نعرہ ہے جو ایوان کو ہلا دے گا۔ عمران خان نے کہا کہ وکلاء کے لانگ مارچ کے لیے ان کی جماعت اور اے پی ڈی ایم کے پیلٹ فارم سے مکمل حمایت کی جائے گی۔

عمران خان نے ایک سوال پر کہا کہ وہ اور ان کی جماعت ضمنی انتخابات میں حصہ نہیں لے گی۔انہوں نے اعتزاز احسن کو وزیراعظم بنانے کی نواز شریف کی تجویز کی توثیق بھی کی تاہم اعتزاز احسن کا کہنا ہے کہ وزیر اعظم سندھ سے ہونا چاہئے اوراگر وہ وزیر اعظم کے امیدوار ہوتے تو سندھی امیدوار کے حق میں دستبردار ہو جاتے۔

اعتزاز احسن نےایک سوال پر صوبہ سرحد کا نام تبدیل کرنے کی حمایت کی اور کہا کہ صوبہ کانام اکثریت رائے کی روشنی میں کیا جائے۔

ادھر سپریم کورٹ بار کےصدر بیرسٹر اعتزاز احسن کو تئیس فروری کو ہونے والے لاہور ہائی کورٹ بار ایسوسی ایشن کے انتخابات میں ووٹ ڈالنے کی اجازت دینے کے لیے ہوم سیکرٹری پنجاب کو درخواست دی گئی ہے۔ یہ درخواست ہائی کورٹ بار کے نائب صدارت کے امیدوار میاں جمیل اختر کی طرف سے دی گئی ہے۔

What Justice(r) Tariq Mehmood has to say....

فوجی آمریت تحریک سے ختم نہیں ہوتی‘

	تحریکوں کے نتیجے میں فوجی آمریت کمزور ضرور ہوئی لیکن۔۔: طارق محمود

پاکستان سپریم کورٹ بار ایسوسی ایشن کے نظربند سابق صدر جسٹس طارق محمود نے کہا ہے کہ پاکستان میں فوجی ڈکٹیٹر شپ سے کسی تحریک کے نتیجے میں چھٹکارا حاصل نہیں ہوا۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ آنے والی قیادت کو موقع فراہم کیا جائے کہ وہ حکومت سازی کے مراحل مکمل کرکے پاکستان کو درپیش مسائل کو حل کرنے پر توجہ دے۔

وکلاء تحریک کے رکن اور بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ کے سابق جج جسٹس ریٹائرڈ طارق محمود نے ای میل کے ذریعے جاری کیے جانے والے اپنے بیان میں کہا کہ تحریک کے نتیجے میں فوجی آمریت کمزور ضرور ہوئی لیکن ایک نئی شکل میں مسلط ہوئی، مثلاً ’ً اس مرتبہ بھی 9 مارچ تک جنرل مشرف کے جانے کے کوئی آثار نہ تھے لیکن 9 مارچ کو وکلاءکو ایک موقع ملا اور تحریک کا آغاز ہوا جس میں میڈیا سول سوسائٹی اور سیاسی پارٹیوں نے بھی بھر پور حصہ لیا۔ اس تحریک کے نتیجے میں یہ ممکن ہوا کہ محترمہ بینظیر بھٹو شہید اور میاں نواز شریف واپس آئے اور فوجی ڈکٹیٹرکو الیکشن کروانا پڑے۔ چونکہ ڈکٹیٹر شپ سے چھٹکارا حاصل کرنے کا ایک راستہ بیلٹ بھی تھا اس لیے جہاں مقبول عام سیاسی جماعتوں نے الیکشن میں حصہ لینے کا فیصلہ کیا وہاں کچھ لوگوں نے بائیکاٹ کا فیصلہ کیا اور بدقسمتی سے وکلاء کی جیلوں سے باہر بیٹھی ہوئی قیادت نےاس کا ساتھ دیا۔ بہرحال الیکشن ہوئے اور سندھ، پنجاب اور سرحد میں نتائج عوام کی امنگوں کے مطابق آئے، بلوچستان میں چونکہ مقبول عام سیاسی پارٹیوں نے بائیکاٹ کا فیصلہ کیا اس لیے وہاں نتائج کچھ مختلف رہے البتہ پیپلز پارٹی وہاں بھی کامیاب رہی اور سرحد میں ایم ایم اے کو وہ ہی ملا جس کی وہ حقدار تھی۔‘

کوئی الہ دین کا چراغ نہیں فوجی ڈکٹیٹروں نے ملک کو مسائلستان بنا دیا ہے۔ اس میں ہر قسم کے مسائل شامل ہیں بشمول عدلیہ کی بحالی ۔لیکن ان تمام مسائل کو حل کرنے کے لیے انتہائی غور وخوص کی ضرورت ہے۔اس لیے اس وقت ہمیں ایسا کوئی قدم نہیں اٹھانا چاہیے جس سے آنے والی قیادت کسی دباؤ کا شکار ہو نظربند سابق جج

نظربند سابق جج نے مزید کہا کہ اس تناظر میں ان کی درخواست ہے کہ اب آنے والی قیادت کو موقع فراہم کیا جائے کہ وہ حکومت سازی کے مراحل مکمل کرکے پاکستان کو درپیش مسائل کو حل کرنے پر توجہ دے۔ ’پاکستان کو فوجی ڈکٹیٹروں نے مسائلستان بنا دیا ہے۔ اس میں ہر قسم کے مسائل شامل ہیں بشمول عدلیہ کی بحالی ۔لیکن ان تمام مسائل کو حل کرنے کے لیے انتہائی غور و فکر کی ضرورت ہے۔ یہ تمام مسائل الہ دین کے چراغ سے حل نہیں ہوسکتے۔ اس لیے اس وقت ہمیں ایسا کوئی قدم نہیں اٹھانا چاہیے جس سے آنے والی قیادت کسی دباؤ کا شکار ہو، نادیدہ قوتیں اس سے فائدہ اٹھائیں اور ہم واپس ایسی جگہ پہنچ جائیں جہاں سے ہمیں ایک نئی تحریک کا آغاز کرنا پڑے۔‘ جسٹس ریٹائرڈ طارق محمود نے اپنی ای میل میں مزید کہا کہ اس وقت ضرورت اس بات کی ہے کہ ایسا رویہ اختیار کیا جائے جس کے نتیجے میں ادارے مضبوط ہوں۔ ’ہمیں ذاتی مفاد کے لیے کام نہیں کرنا چاہیے۔ ہم سب نے قربانیاں ملکی مفاد اور اداروں کو استحکام بخشنے کے لیے دی ہیں۔ ہمیں اپنے بچوں کے لیے ایک خوشحال پاکستان چاہیے جس میں سب کے ساتھ یکساں سلوک ہو اور ہر کسی کو اس کی ا ہلیت کے مطابق ترقی کے یکساں مواقع ملیں۔ہمیں اپنی قربانیوں کے صلے میں کسی ذاتی یا وقتی مفاد کی امید نہیں کرنی چاہیے۔ اس الیکشن کے نتیجے میں پاکستان کے لوگوں نے ہماری قیادت کو ایک سنہری موقع دیا ہے کہ وہ اس ملک کو مشکلات سے نکالے۔ لیکن اس کے لیے ہمیں صبر سے کام لیتے ہوئے ان سے تعاون بھی کرنا چاہیے۔ آج سے ایک آزمائشی دور شروع ہوا ہے اور ہمیں بردباری اور فراست سے کام لیتے ہوئے اس امتحان میں کامیاب ہونا ہے۔‘

Justice Iftikhar addresses Lahore High Court Bar

LAHORE: Deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry Thursday said that no individual has powers to amend the constitution.

In a telephonic address to Lahore High Court Bar, Iftikhar Chaudhry said that the parliament should not endorse the post November 3 measures taken by an individual otherwise it would loose its prestige and encourage the negative traditions.

Iftikhar said that if such steps legitimized than a police official would pressurize judges to get favorable decisions in future.

He said that previous judges can be restored under an executive order in the same way as the new judges were appointed with an executive order under PCO.

Deposed chief justice said that victory is near and lawyers’ moment would soon get the fruit of their struggle. He paid tribute to the lawyers and judges for their struggle.

Lawyers clash with police

Lawyers burning Musharraf' effigy

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan's deposed chief justice rallied supporters from house arrest Thursday, demanding that the new government immediately restore judges axed by President Pervez Musharraf during emergency rule. Soon after, police fired tear gas at nearly 100 protesting lawyers in the southern city of Karachi.

Rallies also were held in the eastern city of Lahore and the southwestern city of Quetta — highlighting some of the challenges the country's two top opposition parties will face as they prepare to form a new government following a sweeping win in parliamentary elections earlier this week.

Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry, one of dozens of independent-minded judges who was removed and replaced by Musharraf late last year, has been detained in his Islamabad home since Nov. 3. Though his phone lines have been cut, he got his hands on a smuggled mobile phone and called lawyers gathering in at least two cities.

Chaudhry told those rallying at the Sindh High Court Bar Association in Karachi that the Pakistani people had repudiated Musharraf in Monday's polls and that unconstitutional measures taken by his archrival in recent months should be reversed.

"Victory is not far off now," he said, calling on judges to be immediately restored. As he spoke, supporters chanted, "Go, Musharraf, go!"

Soon after Chaudhry spoke, police fired tear gas at 100 lawyers demanding Musharraf's ouster. Six of the protesters were arrested for throwing stones at police during the melee outside the city's main court complex, police official Tahir Naveed said.

In Quetta, about 70 lawyers, chanting "Musharraf, your rules we do not accept," rallied in a street outside the main courthouse. About 50 police in full riot gear stood by but there were no incidents. In Lahore, hundreds of lawyers burned an effigy of Musharraf in front of the provincial legislature building in the city.

"There are occasions when a nation passes through defining moments, and the Pakistani nation is passing through this defining moment now," Chaudhry told the Lahore lawyers. "If we lose this opportunity no one can then change the affairs of this nation ever."

The leaders of the two top opposition parties were preparing to meet Thursday for the first time since Monday's election win to discuss the formation of a new government. But they will have to first iron out significant differences — including the future of Musharraf and the restoration of the judiciary.

The Pakistan People's Party of slain former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, now headed by her widower, Asif Ali Zardari, says the parliament should decide on the fate of the embattled president and the deposed judges.

But Nawaz Sharif, also a former premier and the leader of Pakistan Muslim League-N, says Musharraf should be impeached and the justices immediately reinstated.

"If they don't find common ground, it will be an alliance of fire and water," said Zafarullah Khan, executive director of Pakistan's Center for Civic Education.

Though the official count has not yet been released, the two parties had garnered 154 of the 268 contested seats — with just six results still to be announced, according to Pakistan's Election Commission.

If the opposition teams up with smaller parties they could seize a two-thirds majority of parliament, leaving the president vulnerable to impeachment eight years after he seized power in a 1999 coup and went on to become a key U.S. ally in the war on terrorism.

Zardari said after meeting Thursday with the leader of the Awami National Party, winner of nine seats, "we have agreed to work together for democracy." He did not elaborate, but ANP head Asfandyar Ali Khan said "we have to fight together to protect all institutions."

President Bush has said the election results appeared to be fair. He called the Pakistani leader following his party's loss, said White House press secretary Dana Perino, though she would not reveal what they discussed.

She said it was "up to the Pakistani people to decide whether Musharraf retains his position."

One of the first tasks of the new government, expected to be installed by mid-March, will be determining how to fight Islamic extremists, who have expanded their reach beyond traditional northwestern regions bordering Afghanistan.

The country has been hit by dozens of attacks blamed on Muslim militants in recent months that together have left hundreds dead — including Bhutto, killed in a suicide bombing and gun attack on Dec. 27.

Zardari has said he wants to open dialogue with al-Qaida- and Taliban linked militants — a sharp departure from Musharraf's hard-line approach.

What US Senators says about restoration of pre 3rd Nov Judiciary

’عدلیہ بحالی، نئی پارلیمان پر انحصار‘

ہارون رشید بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، اسلام آباد

	افراد سے نہیں اداروں سے تعلقات مستحکم ہونے چاہیں: امریکن سینیٹرز

تین سرکردہ امریکی سینیٹروں نے کہا ہے کہ صدر پرویز مشرف نے انہیں یقین دلایا ہے کہ عدلیہ کی بحالی کا فیصلہ اب نئی پارلیمان کرے گی البتہ ان سینیٹرز کا اصرار تھا کہ حکومت چلانے کے لیے ماضی کو بھلانا ہوگا۔

صدر پرویز مشرف اور پیپلز پارٹی کے شریک چیئر پرسن آصف علی زرداری سے آج ملاقاتوں کے بعد ایک اخباری کانفرنس سے خطاب کرتے ہوئے امریکی سینیٹر جوزف بڈن، سینٹر اور امریکی صدارت کے سابق امیدوار جان کیری اور سینیٹر جیکوک ہیگل نے کہا کہ صدر نے انہیں یقین دلایا ہے کہ وہ نئی حکومت کے ساتھ مل کر کام کرنے کو تیار ہیں۔

صدر مشرف نے عدلیہ کی بحالی سے متعلق اس قسم کا بیان پہلے نہیں دیا ہے۔ صدر اس سے پہلے کہتے رہے ہیں کہ برطرف ججوں کا مسئلہ قصۂ پارینہ بن چکا ہے۔

امریکی سینٹرز نے کہا کہ صدر سمجھتے ہیں کہ عوام نے اپنا فیصلہ دے دیا ہے اور وہ نئے وزیر اعظم اور حکومت کے اختیارات کا احترام کریں گے۔ ان کے مطابق صدر مشرف کا کہنا ہے کہ یہ اب نئی حکومت کا اختیار ہے کہ وہ لاپتہ افراد، عدلیہ اور دیگر مسائل پر کیا پالیسی اختیار کرتی ہے۔

For further details....read on at...
Judiciary Revival and US senators views

What Aitzaz Ahsan has to say about elections and future course of action..

مسلم لیگ ق کی شکست وکلاء تحریک کی کامیابی ہے:اعتزاز احسن

سپریم کورٹ بار ایسوسی ایشن کےصدر اعتزاز احسن نے کہا ہے کہ ان کی ذاتی رائے میں مخدوم امین فہیم وزارت عظمیٰ کے لیے ایک موزوں امیدوار ہے۔

اعتزاز احسن نے کہا کہ مخدوم امین فہیم بینظیر بھٹو کی سرپرستی میں پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی پارلیمنٹرین کے سربراہ تھے۔

انہوں نے کہا کہ انتخابی نتائج کے اعلان کے بعد صدر پرویز مشرف کے پاس مستعفیْ ہونے کے سوا کوئی دوسرا راستہ نہیں ہے۔ان کا کہنا ہےعدلیہ کی بحالی کے لیے نئی پارلیمان کو وقت دینا چاہتے ہیں اور اگر کوئی اس معاملے کو بات چیت کے ذریعے حل کرنا چاہے تو وکلاء اس کے لیے بھی تیار ہیں

اعتزاز احسن پاکستان میں عام انتخابات کے نتائج کے بعد اپنی نظربندی میں اچانک نرمی کے بعد بی بی سی سے بات چیت کررہے تھے۔اعتزاز احسن کا کہنا ہے کہ ان کی نظربندی ابھی ختم نہیں ہوئی صرف یہ نرمی کی گئی ہے کہ گھر پر آنے والوں سے ملاقات کرنے پر اب پابندی نہیں ہے۔

اعتزاز احسن نے واضح کیا کہ اگر نئی حکومت اور پارلیمان نے آٹھ مارچ تک عدلیہ کو بحال نہ کیا تو وکلاء معزول ججوں کی قیادت میں اسلام آباد کی طرف مارچ کریں گے۔

انہوں نے کہا کہ سات مارچ تک سندھ کے معزول جج ملتان پہنچیں گے جہاں یہ جج وکلاء کے ہمراہ آٹھ مارچ کو لاہور آئیں گے اور نومارچ کو اسلام آباد کی طرف مارچ کریں گے، جبکہ سرحد کے وکلاء پشاور ہائی کورٹ کے معزول چیف جسٹس طارق پرویز کی قیادت میں اسلام آباد پہنچیں گ

انہوں نے کہا کہ سپریم کورٹ بار نےنومارچ کو اسلام آباد میں وکلاء کنونشن کی تجویز دی ہے۔

اعتزاز احسن ان وکلا رہنماؤں میں شامل ہیں جو گزشتہ برس ملک میں تین نومبر کو لگائی جانے والی ایمرجنسی کے بعد سے نظر بند ہیں۔ ان کا کہنا ہے کہ اٹھارہ فروری کے انتخابات کے نتائج کے بعد ہوا کا رخ بدلتا ہوا محسوس ہورہا ہے۔

سپریم کورٹ بار کے صدر کا کہنا ہے کہ صدر پرویز مشرف نے اپنی تمام سیاسی جمع پونجی اور صلاحیتیں مسلم لیگ ق کی انتخابی مہم پر لگادیں تھیں اور دو سال کے دوران صدر مشرف نے وردری اور بغیر وردری کے ق لیگ کے جلسوں میں شرکت کی۔

ان کا کہنا ہے کہ جنرل مشرف لیگ کو قومی اسمبلی کی دو سو ستر نشستوں میں صرف چالیس نشستیں ملیں ہیں۔اعتزاز احسن کی رائے ہے کہ انتخابی نتائج کے بعد صدر پرویزمشرف کے پاس مستعفیْ ہونے کے علاوہ کوئی راستہ نہیں ہے۔

اعتزاز احسن کا، جو پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کے مرکزی رہنما بھی ہیں، کہنا ہے کہ میری ذاتی خواہش تھی کہ پیپلز پارٹی کو سادہ اکثریت مل جاتی تاکہ وہ وفاق میں اپنی خود حکومت بناتی۔

انہوں نے کہا کہ عوام صدر پرویز مشرف کے خلاف ہیں اور جسٹس افتخار محمد چودھری کے حق میں ہیں۔ ان کا کہنا ہے کہ عوام اس بات کو کس طرح فراموش کر سکتے ہیں کہ چیف جسٹس کو قید میں رکھا گیا ہے۔ اعتزاز احسن کے بقول مسلم لیگ ق کی شکست وکلاء تحریک کی کامیابی ہے

Pakistan election proves tense, chaotic and inconclusive

Published in International Herald Tribune on February 18, 2008
By: Jane Perlez and Carlotta Gall

Fearful of violence and deterred by confusion at polling stations, Pakistanis voted Monday in parliamentary elections that may fail to produce clear winners and could result in protracted post-election political skirmishing.

A number of clashes among polling officials and voters resulted in 10 people killed and 70 wounded, according to Pakistani television channels.

Suppressed by fears of violence and vote rigging, turnout was low, which was expected to favor President Pervez Musharraf and the party that supports him, the Pakistan Muslim League-Q.

Within hours of the polls closing, however, several major defeats were reported for Musharraf's party, which some of his party workers took as a harbinger of bad news to come.

Though no official results were yet announced, those parliamentary seats appeared to go instead to the Pakistan Muslim League-N, the opposition faction of the same party that supports the president's main rival, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

For further details...

Pakistan elections proves tense, chaotic and inconclusive

Pakistan Elections and World reaction..

US media closely follows crucial Pakistan vote

Courtesy: Daily Times

WASHINGTON: The US media on Monday covered Pakistan’s elections closely, analysing what impact the outcome could have on the country’s future policies, particularly in the context of combating terrorism in the region.

The mainstream American newspapers and news channels intently reported the election process with experts voicing their opinions on how the widely-anticipated vote could bring about democratic transition and pull the country out of crisis.

CNN discussed the significance of the poll in the context of US-Pakistan anti-terror cooperation. Experts told the channel that the vote could be a landmark in setting the country course on a progressive path as public opinion had sharply turned against militancy.

The Fox News channel reported that the elections were generally peaceful. “The shape of the new government will effect the future shape of war on terror” in the region, a Fox News correspondent said.

The Washington Post carried two major stories in its print edition, weighing the prospects of the election being fair and transparent in the light of public opinion. It also highlighted the reasons for the United States’ deep interest in the vote. The newspaper also hosted a discussion on the Post Global bog, with the writer making a case for political forces unifying post-election in the face of the challenges confronting the country.

“Pakistan voters defy threats” was the headline of a news story in USA Today, which reported on electoral process in view of security situation in the run-up to the vote.

The Los Angeles Times headlined its story “Pakistan polls close; no major attacks,” as it praised the bravery of the millions of voters across the country who cast ballots despite threat of violence. “A campaign marked by bombings and an assassination is capped by an election day free of major attacks,” the sub-headline of the story read.

The New York Times and The Christian Science Monitor front-paged their stories with pictures of the Pakistani polls.

Pakistani Lawyers campaign for poll boycott

LAHORE (Reuters) - A group of Pakistan lawyers said on Friday they would campaign outside polling stations to try to persuade voters to boycott the February 18 election in protest at the imprisonment of judges and lawyers.

Pakistan's parliamentary election is seen as key to bringing stability to the nuclear-armed state following months of political turmoil which began when President Pervez Musharraf tried to sack the country's top judge in March last year.

Lawyers launched a series of nationwide protests against the move, widely backed by opposition parties and ordinary people. Hundreds of lawyers were later jailed for short periods.

"We will set up camps outside the polling station to dissuade voters from the process," said Ghulam Nabi Bhatti, vice-president of Pakistan's Supreme Court Bar Association.

He said lawyers had been holding a series of meetings and distributing flyers and pamphlets to convince people not to vote.

Bhatti said a free and fair election was impossible while Iftikhar Chaudhary, the chief justice Musharraf removed, and several other judges were still under house arrest.

Musharraf imposed six weeks of emergency rule in November last year and sacked Chaudhary and the other judges who were seen as hostile to his eventually successful bid to be re-elected as president.

While Musharraf himself is not contesting the election, the opposition have warned of possible irregularities in the poll which may benefit the party which backs the president.

Pakistan's two main opposition parties are contesting the election, but a number of smaller groups have stayed out of the poll and are calling for a mass boycott.

AG acknowledges massive rigging

By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers

FAISALABAD, Pakistan — A prominent U.S.-based human rights group Friday released what it said was a recording of Pakistan's attorney general acknowledging that next week's national elections would be "massively" rigged.

Human Rights Watch said a journalist made the recording during a telephone interview with Attorney General Malik Qayyum when Qayyum took a second call without disconnecting the first, allowing his end of the second conversation to be overheard and recorded.

In the recording, Qayyum, Pakistan's top legal officer, can be heard advising the caller to accept a ticket he is being offered by an unidentified political party for a seat, Human Rights Watch said.

"They will massively rig to get their own people to win," Qayyum said, according to a transcript released by Human Rights Watch. "If you get a ticket from these guys, take it."

The potentially incendiary recording was made the day that elections were announced for Jan. 8, according to Human Rights Watch, which said the Urdu-language recording could be heard on its Web site, www.hrw.org. The polls for the national assembly and four provincial legislatures were postponed until this Monday after large-scale violence ignited by the Dec. 27 assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

The recording was certain to add to widespread fears that the polls will be rigged in favor of the Pakistan Muslim League-Q, the party that supports the authoritarian and hugely unpopular president, Pervez Musharraf, a retired army general who seized power in a 1999 coup.

On Thursday, Musharraf warned the opposition that it must accept the outcome of Monday's voting, without resorting to massive street protests.

"Let there be no doubt that anyone will be allowed to resort to lawlessness in the garb of allegations about rigging in the elections," Musharraf was quoted as telling a seminar of government officials in Islamabad by the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan. "Let this serve as a warning to all those who think they can disturb the peace of the country. They will not be allowed. Do not test the resolve of the government."

"No agitation, anarchy or chaos can be acceptable," he said. "I assure you that the elections will be fair, free, and transparent and peaceful."

Fears that the polls will be fixed have been stoked by a series of public opinion surveys showing the Pakistan Peoples Party and other parties poised to capture enough seats to begin impeachment proceedings against Musharraf for controversial constitutional changes he imposed last year to extend his grip on power.

Musharraf's standing, and that of the Pakistan Muslim League-Q, also has been hurt by skyrocketing prices, shortages of electricity, gas and wheat, a failure to contain the Islamic insurgency based in the tribal area bordering Afghanistan and Pakistan's support for the Bush administration's fight against al Qaida.

"There have been numerous allegations of irregularities, including arrests and harassment of opposition candidates and party members. There are also allegations that state resources, administration, and state machinery are being used to the advantage of candidates backed by President Pervez Musharraf," Human Rights Watch said in a statement.

Human Rights Watch said it had tried repeatedly to contact Qayyum, a staunch supporter of Musharraf, but had been unable to reach him.

On Thursday, the widower of assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Asif Ali Zadari, held a final campaign rally in the same dusty park where his wife gave her first political address in 1977.

Security was intense, reflecting a surge in suicide bombings that's included attacks on opposition campaign rallies. Police sharpshooters scanned the crowds from rooftops and black-clad commandos stood among scores of security men deployed around the stage.

The stage itself was set far back from fences of steel scaffolding and barbed wire that restrained the flag- and banner-waving crowd of about 6,000. Zadari spoke from behind a podium made of bulletproof glass and steel.

Without mentioning Musharraf by name, Zardari, who assumed joint chairmanship of the party with his son after Bhutto's slaying, said that it was time "to change our system."

"Benazir was a martyr. She believed in you, in the brothers and sisters, and I also believe in you," he proclaimed

Protest rallies and the right to freedom of expression

Nauman Qaiser

In true democracies, peaceful protests are deemed as a personification of the concept of freedom of expression, for which these societies have fought long-drawn battles. The government, too, obtains the necessary feed back from these demonstrations to rectify its public policies. That is why these peaceful rallies are not suppressed viciously the way they are in “fake” democracies like Pakistan.

Saturday’s protest rally in Islamabad, the Capital of Pakistan, by the lawyers and the members of the civil society was nothing more than a benign effort on part of the concerned citizens of Pakistan to record their resentment at the misguided policies of the present government. But the way this rally was stifled not only shows government’s lack of awareness of the boons of these rallies, but also exposes its double standards. On the one hand, it claims to believe in democracy; but, on the other hand it does not even allow the peaceful citizens to express their sentiments in these demonstrations. Instead tear gas, rubber bullets and stones are used by the law enforcement agencies to “greet” the protesters, whose fault is that they desire a genuine democracy with free and independent judiciary in their country.

On top of it all, Mr. Musharraf has the audacity to say in front of the world media that true democracy does not suit Pakistan and its culture; therefore, he proposes, that his brand of controlled democracy should be supported, in which media could be curbed; judges could be deposed, that too in dozens; lawyers and students could be brutally beaten up and arrested; daily food items like flour and sugar could go beyond the reach of the rank and file – all on the pretext of “national interest” and the mantra of “Pakistan comes first”.

A western reader would be bemused to read about this brand of democracy, which has all the requisites of a brutal dictatorship. General (r) Musharraf should, therefore realize that he cannot befoul us by claiming to be a democratically elected president of Pakistan. The rubber stump parliament, pliant beauracracy and the involvement of military in politics does not even give a semblance of a democratic dispensation in the country. In this gloomy scenario, it was the judiciary lead by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary, which showed us that there was a light at the end of the tunnel. But, alas, this pillar of the state too was “murdered” brutally.

In order to bring the true democracy in Pakistan, all sections of the society including the politicians need to play their due role, because the path to democracy is long and filled with thorns. We need to create awareness among the masses, especially the poor class of the society, of their rights, so they do not sit at homes and curse their destiny for the wronged policies of the government. The middle class, which has been the backbone of the worldwide movements, also needs to realize that without its active participation, we cannot even think of the bringing true democracy in the country. The political parties should also shun the politics of expediency and instead focus on the well being of their voters.

Unfortunately, besides the poor lawyers, who have sacrificed even their bread and butter for the sake of their principles, no section of the society is willing to come on the roads in large numbers to give impetus to the current movement. Until and unless the civil society and the political parties realize their potential to bring true democracy in Pakistan, the lawyers’ effort alone may not bring the desired fruits.