Ex-generals plan long march, sit-in at Army House –>Rauf Klasra(The news)

Read the news item below and see even the seniors of dictator musharraf dont like him.

Ex-generals plan long march, sit-in at Army House(The News)
By Rauf Klasra

ISLAMABAD: Retired Army generals, including some who trained and groomed Pervez Musharraf, have planned a long march and a sit-in before the Army House in Rawalpindi to get it vacated so that Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani could move in.

The long march, the date of which will be announced soon, is being given final touches. The procession to force Musharraf to vacate the Army House would be led by former Army chief Mirza Aslam Beg and General (retd) Hamid Gul and about 200 retired Army officers will be there.

The presence of General (retd) Ali Quli Khan in the rally would be watched with a lot of interest by many as he was not only the course mate of Musharraf, but once the main candidate for the slot of Chief of Army staff.

Ali Quli had fallen victim to palace intrigues as Nawaz Sharif’s personal bias against him had helped Musharraf to capture the top slot. Another ex-Army general, General (retd) Faiz Chishti has been actively putting pressure on Musharraf to quit the post of Army Chief.

Talking to The News, Brig (retd) Mian Mohammad Mahmud, who is from the first PMA and an organiser of the event, confirmed that the top retired Army generals had decided to stage the long march. Brig Mahmud said efforts are under way to bring maximum number of Army generals in the demonstration as this issue concerns the reputation of the Pakistan Army.

Meanwhile, Brig Mahmud also handed over a statement on behalf of ex-Army servicemen. The statement said the common man’s urgent problems need to be addressed immediately. To examine the vital issues, a meeting of all like-minded and patriotic ex-servicemen is being called shortly, it said. A date will be announced soon, it said.

 

Advertisements

Aitzaz quits poll race to focus on long march

Thanks Aitzaz Ahsan for taking the right decision because the elections of 18 Feb 2008 brought no change in Pakistan.

PPP has become q-League part 2 or in-fact q-league ++ when it comes to serving the foreign agenda which also includes the destruction of our judicial system(as well as economic and social systems).

so people of Pakistan get ready for 10 June battle for the truth and justice in Pakistan.

Aitzaz quits poll race to focus on long march (DAWN)

By Ahmad Fraz Khan

LAHORE, May 18: Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Aitzaz Ahsan has pulled out of the electoral race to save the Pakistan People’s Party from an embarrassing situation because at around the time of the coming by-election he will be leading the lawyers’ long march and movement for reinstatement of the deposed judges.

Addressing a press conference here on Sunday, Mr Ahsan said he had informed Pakistan People’s Party co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari on Saturday that he was withdrawing his application for the PPP ticket for the by-election.

The SCBA chief said he wanted to concentrate on making the long march a success.

He said the long march would be a decisive factor in the struggle launched by the lawyers 14 months ago and it needed his full-time devotion.

The SCBA president announced that the long march would begin from Multan on June 10.

After attending gatherings of Sahiwal and Okara bars, the caravan of judges and lawyers will move to Lahore. The next day it would proceed to Islamabad via Gujranwala, Gujrat and Jhelum, he said, adding that the same day another caravan of lawyers would converge on Islamabad from Peshawar.

“The lawyers will go to parliament which is at the centre of the current controversy.”

A lawyers’ meeting held here on Saturday had expressed confidence in the leadership of Mr Ahsan and left the decision about taking part in the by-election to him.“Since all arrangements for the long march are to be made and contesting the by-election may also put the PPP in an awkward position, it is better to withdraw from the electoral race and concentrate on the lawyers’ movement,” he said.

He said that people must translate their love for deposed Chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry into action.

Mr Ahsan appealed to all ‘conscious segments’ of the society, including students, traders, members of the civil society, political workers, professionals and the media, to join the struggle for independent judiciary. It was the “only way to safeguard the future of the nation,” he insisted.

He said the presidency was continuing to hatch conspiracies against democracy and one proof of this was that the attorney-general had not been changed.

Mr Ahsan said the lawyers would call off the long march if the judges were reinstated before June 10.

In reply to a question, he said the decisions of the Supreme Court presided over by Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar could be covered under the ‘de facto doctrine’ after the reinstatement of the deposed judges. He said he did not know whether the deposed judges would take up the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) after their reinstatement.

Mr Ahsan conceded that he had differences with the PPP co-chairman on the issue of the judiciary but refused to provide details.

When asked if the lawyers intended to picket the General Headquarters or parliament at the end of their long march, Mr Ahsan said the army did not have any role in the current crisis and the lawyers were convinced about the neutrality of Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashfaq Kayani.

Lawyers announce the date for long march(10 june)–>APDM to meet on 18 May

In All Pakistan lawyers convention, Pakistan bar council (PBC) has announced the date of long March for the restoration of judiciary .

The date decided with the mutual consensus is 10 th of June 2008 and according to SCBA president Aitzaz Ahsan the Chief Guest for the March will be the honorable genuine CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary.

Lawyers have formed a committee to decide the future coarse of the movement.

APDM to Meet on 18 May

APDM will hold a meeting on 18 May in Islamabad to decide the future line of action for the movement to restore judiciary in Pakistan.

according to a report by The News:

“Experts from all segments of the society would be invited to the conference. They would take into account the current situation and express their views to chalk out the future line of action,” sources in APDM told The News here on Friday.

The sources further said the committee, which included Liaquat Baloch, Akram Shah,

Dr Hameed Memon and Sardar Zaheer, would hold a session to decide a date for the conference, prepare the draft of invitation and alsofinalise the names of those

who were to be invited to the forum.

That’s what we call democracy?–>Shireen Mazari was asked to leave in 15 minutes

 

That’s what we call democracy?

In Pakistan if you want to remain in your position or want to gain something then you need becom an American pet otherwise you will be kicked out like Dr. Mazari any ways if you are reading this Dr. Mazari you should know we are proud of you and your work for the country.

May Allah give you success in the future.

 

 Shireen Mazari was asked to leave in 15 minutes
Saturday, May 17, 2008
By Mariana Baabar(The News)

ISLAMABAD: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Thursday once again acted in indecent haste when the DG Administration at the Foreign Office asked Dr Shireen Mazari, the sacked DG Institute of Strategic Studies, to leave in 15 minutes.

“I was taken aback as I needed time to clear up my office and to bid farewell to researchers and the staff at the institute. But I was sent a backdated notification of May 14, stating the termination of my services.

Then I was literally harassed by the Foreign Office, saying I had fifteen minutes to leave the office as my successor Tanvir Ahmed Khan was about to arrive to take over,” Mazari told The News.

However, as in the past, the Foreign Office was simply harassing her because the notification of Tanvir’s appointment was delivered to the ISSI at around noon, and was sent to Tanvir at his residence much later, former foreign minister Inamul Haq, Chairperson ISSI, told The News.

There was no way that the Foreign Office could possibly have ensured the presence of Tanvir Ahmad Khan in fifteen minutes when he had not even received his orders. Former Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan was earlier removed in a similar manner.

But before she quickly left for home and sent the official car back, Dr Shireen Mazari got a call from Hussain Haqqani, who landed at Mazari’s office with a bouquet, which the angry Mazari left for her successor.

Haqqani apologised that there had been some mix-up, and she should be allowed to stay on for a month as entailed in her contract and that he would speak to the foreign secretary about it. Mazari clearly told him that her sacking was because of her independent views that had upset the US camp, which was dictating to the PPP government.

The final countdown—>Legal Eye by Babar Sattar on Emergency mailing list

The final countdown
Legal eye
 
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Babar Sattar
 
The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad. He is a Rhodes scholar and has an LL.M from Harvard Law School
 
Asif Zardari asserts that judges cannot be restored through an executive order for (a) the Dogar Court can stay such order thus creating a constitutional
crisis and (b) removing the midnight appointees of General Musharraf through an executive order would be wrong, just like removing the constitutional judges
was wrong, and that two wrongs don’t make a right. The arguments don’t really wash. It has been asserted in this space before that if a stay order issued
by the existing court is a real deterrent, then this entire debate is redundant. For the Dogar Court has already validated all the Nov 3 actions of the
general, including that of dismissing judges. Second, the rationale for restoring the Nov 2 judges is that the tenure of constitutionally appointed judges
is protected and they can only be removed pursuant to Article 209 proceedings, on the advice of the Supreme Judicial Council.
 
The deposed judges have been unlawfully restrained from performing duty as the mandatory removal process was not followed in ousting them. Thus they are
still judges and can be allowed to resume duty with an executive order acknowledging the same. The Article 209 protection doesn’t apply to the general’s
post-Nov 3 appointees, because they are not constitutionally appointed judges. The PPP, under the leadership of Mr Zardari, has refused to abide by this
majority opinion of the legal fraternity. Is it a coincident that the PPP has chosen to follow a minority and largely discredited legal opinion on the
proper mode of restoring judges pandered by the likes of Sharifuddin Pirzada and Hafiz Pirzada who are responsible in large part for our convoluted constitutional
jurisprudence? According to this opinion the general’s unconstitutional actions cannot be undone without a constitutional amendment or else we will set
a legal precedent that will have horrendous consequences for the nation.
 
What consequences are we talking about? If Hafiz Pirzada’s advice is adhered to, the precedent we are setting is that any unlawful changes made to the
constitution by a dictator by use of force will automatically attract the protection of the constitution, and can only be undone by meeting the high threshold
set to amend the constitution. The idea that if judges are restored through an executive order, the executive will in future be able to do all sorts of
crazy things through executive orders is simply preposterous. The executive order will simply be reiterating the twin constitutional principles that that
under no circumstance can (i) the constitution be amended without a two-thirds parliamentary majority required by Article 239 of the constitution, and
(ii) constitutionally-appointed judges be removed without following the process mandated by Article 209.
 
It is hard to believe that despite being counseled by Fakharudin G Ebrahim, Aitzaz Ahsan, Raza Rabbani and the legal opinion of sixteen judges including
almost all former chief justices, the PPP is still genuinely confused about the legal issues underlying this debate. Why then is this popular national
party jeopardizing its mandate by flip-flopping on the judges’ issue? A few explanations come to mind.
 
First, the negotiations between General Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto came to fruition in Dubai in the backdrop where the general was feeling the heat due
to the lawyers’ movement and wanted some respite. It is possible that some explicit promises with regard to the PPP supporting the general against Chief
Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary were made part of this deal. As this deal was brokered by the general’s western allies and supported by the UAE rulers — and
Mr Zardari duly credited the US for getting the general to shun his uniform on BB’s insistence — PPP’s current leadership might be convinced that reneging
on a promise made to the US and PPP’s other foreign sponsors will carry more political cost than backtracking on a popular domestic issue and breaking
a promise made to the people of Pakistan.
 
Second, there is a structural change underway in the composition of the establishment at the moment. Traditionally, the judiciary as an institution was
part of the establishment, and the PML-N and its successor political forces comprised the establishment’s B-team. And the PPP might have a point when it
complains that the judiciary has in the past applied the constitution more enthusiastically when the outcome favoured the PML-N as opposed to the PPP.
After March 9, 2007, however, the judiciary reluctantly decided to confront the egregiousness of the establishment and their divorce was finalized on Nov
3, 2007. Simultaneously, having learnt lessons from its time in exile and from suffering persecution at the hands of the Musharraf regime since Oct 12,
1999, the PML-N has also emerged as an anti-establishment party for the first time since its inception.
 
These two happenings have created a vacuum that the establishment wishes to fill by (i) resurrecting a court (that includes its post-Nov 3 midnight appointees)
committed to the status-quo, and (ii) co-opting a ‘reconciliation-seeking’ PPP that can function as the political ally of the establishment and will be
allowed to rule in return within the four corners of policy areas delegated to political governments during democratic times. This is certainly not another
grand conspiracy theory. We can replace the word ‘establishment’ with the term ‘status-quo forces’. The point being made is that the polity is undergoing
a structural transformation and the traditional actors that functioned as agents of status quo have opted to become forces of change.
 
Consequently it is extremely tempting for the PPP — which has ruled for a maximum of five years over the last three decades despite being the largest
political party of the country — to fill the pro-status quo slots that have opened up due to the coup of the judiciary and the PML-N, in return for being
treated as the favoured political entity by the establishment and overtly supported by the Dogar Court. The fact that the current PPP leadership is dominated
by individuals who have no popular roots in the masses and don’t seem beholden to Bhuttoism or the ideology of ‘roti, kapra aur makan’ — which by definition
is pro-people and anti-establishment — exacerbates the danger of the PPP chewing on this bate. Would it not be a grave tragedy if the predominant lessons
that the PPP has learnt in its 40-year existence turns out to be that (i) the desires of the US administration must trump wishes of Pakistani people when
the two are in conflict, and (ii) not getting on the wrong side of the establishment even at the cost of compromising principles makes for better politics?
 
The judges’ issue is one that has stirred the collective conscience of our nation like none other in recent history. What is at stake foremost is whether
we as a nation will side with rule of law or politics of expediency. The return of judges will not function as elixir for all the maladies afflicting Pakistan.
But if we squander this opportunity it will take at least a decade to raise another breed of judges who might muster the courage to stand and fight to
liberate the judiciary from the crutches of the establishment.
 
Second, many of Pakistan’s problems spring from the imbalance in the distribution of state authority between civil and military institutions. This is a
time in our history when the military needs to demonstrate its neutrality toward politics due to political compulsions and to protect its own institutional
interests. If our political elites fail to regain some of the lost ground in these circumstances, we might have to suffer another reckless dictator to
create overwhelming public support for such change.
 
And third, the restoration of judges brought about by dint of a freedom movement supported by the nation will be tremendously emancipating psychologically.
For too long have we given too much credit (or discredit) to the ‘forces that be’ for controlling our fate. But returning our judges against the wishes
of the establishment and its foreign patrons, we could prove to ourselves that we are not puppets but a sovereign people who have control over our present
and our future.
 
The issue of restoration isn’t merely a political dispute but one of individual and collective choices that is defining the personal identity and moral
standing of the actors involved. The lawyers’ movement has been advocating that the promise and practice of law must be brought into closer alignment and
this modest goal resonates will many around the country. The judges should be restored and can be restored but not without a forceful street movement that
forces our ruling political elite to acknowledge that people are not willing to allow the country to recede into another round of musical chairs between
conviction-less politicians and generals.
 
And to achieve that the lawyers must boycott all courts – not just higher courts — for at least a few weeks to bring the judicial system to a grinding
halt. It is time to move from the go-slow phase to the pens-down phase at this decisive stage of this historic movement. Without this and a forceful street
movement the deposed judges might be history.
 

All rise!–>by Yousuf Nasim on Dawn Blog

reporters following a comprehensive discussion regarding rising inflation, rule of law and political instability in the country.

Achakzai told reporters that the alliance had agreed to form a committee to work out a procedure by which apex and high court judges who were deposed by President Musharraf on November 3, 2007, might be reinstated. He argued that since Musharraf had openly admitted that his actions had been extra-constitutional there could be no legal justification for stalling the restoration any further.

Imran Khan continued by saying that the delay was nothing more than an attempt to protect the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) from being struck down, thus resurrecting criminal cases against government leaders such as Asif Zardari.

The APDM decided to address the ‘judges’ issue following the resignation of the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N), a member of the ruling coalition, from the cabinet. PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif chose to take the drastic step after failing to secure a solution to the problem during negotiations with the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) who hold a majority of seats in the National Assembly. The resignation of key figures such as Minister of Finance Ishaq Dar has created problems for the new government, which is still struggling to cement its position and quell public concern over food inflation and the deteriorating law and order situation.

ISSI DG Shireen Mazari removed on US pressure

Dr. Shireen Mazari has been removed from the position of Director General Institute of Strategic Studies(ISSI) Islamabad before the completion of her contract term till August 2009.

According to Dr. Mazari her removal is a result of US government pressure as she was writing hard-hitting articles on the US interference in the Pakistani internal affairs.

Reports say Tanvir Ahmed Khan will take over the position from her.