Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by admin in Foreign Policy on November 23rd, 2012
The international war on terror has caused more suffering, deaths and destruction to the people of Pakistan than of any other country in the world. Soon after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, Pakistan allied itself with the United States and the international community in the war against terror. The US-led invasion against the government of Taliban in Afghanistan commenced in 2001. The Talibans were defeated but could not be eliminated. Their resistance has now assumed the shape of an insurgency and an armed struggle against the foreign forces and their local supporters. During the last three decades (1978-2008), Afghanistan has been in a state of war: first against the Soviet Union, later amongst themselves, then against the Taliban government and, at present, against the Western forces. Pakistan has had to accommodate millions of refugees entering the country since 1978. In the beginning, their number had risen to about six million but even at present this is not less than 2.6 million. Since Pakistan is a major non- NATO ally and is supporting the war against the militants in Afghanistan, the Taliban insurgency has spilled over to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), adjacent to Afghanistan, and is gradually threatening the adjoining settled areas of North West Frontier Province (NWFP) as well as causing sporadic acts of violence and terrorism in the rest of the country. The fight against militants during the past two years (2007-2008) alone has cost Pakistan over 1000 members of its law enforcement agencies (LEAs) and about 4000 civilians, besides injuring over 2000 members of LEAs and about 8000 others. As an impact of this war, terrorist activities are on the rise, the economy is sliding downward, the much-needed foreign investment is not forthcoming and the development of the country is being adversely affected. It is officially estimated that Pakistan has suffered a loss of about Rs. 678 billion during the last five years and as much as Rs. two to three trillion during the previous decade. Pakistan is likely to continue to suffer as long as there is no peace in Afghanistan. During the last three decades (1978-2008), Afghanistan has been in a state of war: first against the Soviet Union, later amongst themselves, then against the Taliban government and, at present, against the Western forces. Pakistan has had to accommodate millions of refugees entering the country since 1978. In the beginning, their number had risen to about six million but even at present this is not less than 2.6 million. Since Pakistan is a major non- NATO ally and is supporting the war against the militants in Afghanistan, the Taliban insurgency has spilled over to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), adjacent to Afghanistan, and is gradually threatening the adjoining settled areas of North West Frontier Province (NWFP) as well as causing sporadic acts of violence and terrorism in the rest of the country.The fight against militants during the past two years (2007-2008) alone has cost Pakistan over 1000 members of its law enforcement agencies (LEAs) and about 4000 civilians, besides injuring over 2000 members of LEAs and about 8000 others. As an impact of this war, terrorist activities are on the rise, the economy is sliding downward, the much-needed foreign investment is not forthcoming and the development of the country is being adversely affected. It is officially estimated that Pakistan has suffered a loss of about Rs. 678 billion during the last five years and as much as Rs. two to three trillion during the previous decade. Pakistan is likely to continue to suffer as long as there is no peace in Afghanistan.
Posted by admin in Announcement, Law on November 23rd, 2012
Mr Chaudhry has a reputation for charting an independent courseThe controversial career of Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in some respects mirrors that of two of the country’s leading politicians.
Like President Aif Ali Zardari and opposition leader Nawaz Sharif – imprisoned and self-exiled respectively in the course of their careers – Mr Chaudhry made a dramatic return to his position as the country’s top judicial job in 2009 after being unceremoniously sacked two years years earlier.
Pakistan’s top lawyer has form when it comes to opposing the sitting government.
He was one of several judges sacked by President Musharraf after they questioned his right to remain in office. He was reinstated following a long series of street marches in which tens of thousands of people – including many fellow lawyers – rallied around him in a movement that ultimately led to the ousting of Mr Musharraf.
For a time after his reappointment Mr Chaudhry enjoyed a strong populist image, seen as a champion of the rule of law and praised as the only judge in history to have stood up to a military ruler and won.
But in June 2012 he was put in the embarrassing position of having to exclude himself from the bench hearing allegations of corruption made by a business tycoon against his son, Arsalan.
The chief justice initiated the case as a response to accusations that Arsalan had accepted millions of dollars in bribes. Both he and his son deny any wrong-doing.
Lawyers came out in support of Mr Chaudhry after his dismissal in 2007
The BBC’s M Ilyas Khan in Islamabad says that in-fighting between Pakistan’s various institutions of state has destabilised the country’s nascent democratic set-up and further tainted its largely mistrusted legal system.
Yet despite the squabbling and allegations of partisanship, Chief Justice Chaudhry is still considered by many to be the symbol of justice, rule of law and democracy.
His role at the centre of Pakistan’s complicated power structure is a far cry from his earlier background.
Iftikhar Chaudhry was born to a lower middle class family in the western city of Quetta in 1948. He studied law at the local university and started a legal practice in Quetta in 1974.
He tried his hand in many fields of the law – civil, criminal, tax, revenue and, later, constitutional – and qualified for legal practice at the Supreme Court in 1985.
In 1989, the Balochistan provincial government appointed him as its advocate general, and the next year he became a judge of the Balochistan High Court.
He became the chief justice of Balochistan in April 1999 and was elevated to the Supreme Court of Pakistan in February 2000. On June 30 2005 he was appointed the chief justice of Pakistan.
Working overtimeDuring this period, Justice Chaudhry did not betray any signs of breaking with the past traditions in order to chart an independent course for himself.
The Supreme court is at the centre of a battle between Pakistani institutions of stateHe sat on four pivotal Supreme Court benches between 2000 and 2005 that validated the military takeover by Gen Musharraf, his referendum, his legal framework order (LFO) and the 17th constitutional amendment that gave the president additional powers and allowed him to continue as the army chief.
Although Justice Chaudhry voted with the majority on each bench, he did not head any of them.
However, after becoming the country’s youngest chief justice, he became eager to secure the independence of the Supreme Court and showed a lot of energy in working overtime to clear the backlog of cases.
He established a separate human rights cell at the court for cases involving so-called honour crimes.
He also took on the government and the military, forcing the intelligence agencies to admit they held dozens of people in secret custody.
Getting the administrative and policing system to deliver in such cases often necessitated harsh handling of officials in the court.
He grew increasingly unpopular with those officials, but became the darling of human rights groups whose activists came out in large numbers to support him when he was suspended by President Musharraf.
Observers believe that two factors played a decisive role in elevating him from the realm of the ordinary to that of a hero.
First was the TV image of the judge defiantly resisting reprimands for alleged misconduct by President Musharraf, who at that time was becoming an increasingly unpopular military ruler.
The second was his courage in refusing to step down as a result of this pressure.
The dominant theme of the proceedings – then as now – was of a judge at the centre of a hard-fought and often bitter power struggle between Pakistan’s institutions of state.
The Supreme Court was created under the Constitution of 1956. It succeeded the Federal Court, set up in 1948, which was successor to the Federal Court of India, established in 1937. Since its creation in 1956, the Supreme Court has retained its name and jurisdiction through the successive legal instruments including the Constitution of 1973.
The Constitution of 1956 provided that the Supreme Court shall sit in Karachi and at such other place as the Chief Justice of Pakistan, with the approval of the President may decide. The Court was housed initially at Karachi but later on shifted to Lahore and housed in the High Court building. The 1973 Constitution provided for the permanent seat of the Court at Islamabad. The non-availability of funds however prevented the construction of the building. The Court shifted in 1974 from Lahore to Rawalpindi and was housed in an improvised building called East Pakistan House. In 1989, funds were allocated for the new building at Islamabad and construction started in 1990. The work was completed and on 31st December 1993, the Court shifted to its new premises in Islamabad.
The present building is a majestic addition on the Constitution Avenue in the Federal Capital. Its white marbled façade depicts the strength of the institution to uphold the principles of rule of law and constitutionalism in the country. The openbook front elevation reflects a unique synthesis of Islamic and Japanese architectural tradition emphasizing the importance of education, transparency and equality before law as avowed objectives of the judicial organ of the State of Pakistan. The Court also has branch registries at each of the four provincial headquarters. Cases are filed at principal seat and/or branch registries. Benches of the Court rotate between the principal seat and branch registries to dispose of cases. With wide/broad jurisdiction of the Court, it is a great relief to the litigant parties to have easy and convenient access to justice, closer to home town.
Posted by admin in Morosi Siyasat & Political Crooks on November 23rd, 2012
Operation: “Get Imran Khan! “Nawaz Sharif is running scared of Imran Khan. PML(N) “Jiyalas,” are using fair and foul means to smear Imran’s character; and accuse him of philandering, corruption, and malfeasance with Shaukat Khanum funds. Nawaz Sharif has touts, one of which PTT editor has also met at a social function. This PML(N) tout’s main mission is to spread rumors about Imran Khan and to assassinate Imrans’ character.
Making “Phudhoo of Pakistani People.
Kamran Shahid joins hands with PMLN to malign Imran Khan and his PTI
Mole Spy
He not only made the point through ‘planted’ programme that “Imran is a liar and snob” but also declared that Khan’s party would be in tatters before the election”. In the programme the participants established that ‘Imran used to bring Holy Quran to settle matters with new comers to his party’.
As Chaudhry Nisar is worried that PPP is ‘buying some anchors and columnists’ the PML-N is also not lagging behind in wooing Kamran like stuff.
Let’s see at the end of the day the PPP and PMLN could manage to get the ‘services’ of how many known anchors and journalists.
Posted by admin in Uncategorized on November 23rd, 2012
Dear Patrons:
Asalaam alaykum and Hello to our Global Patrons:
The site has been static due to revamping, This has been completed and the site is better and ready to serve the people of Sohni Dharti.
Please Enjoy our Articles, Opinions, and Reports
Administrator & Board of PTT
Posted by admin in Global Issues on November 23rd, 2012
Why is the world ignoring Myanmar’s Rohingya? Aung San Suu Kyi is now a victimizer of Rohingya. She is ingnoring the persecution of Rohingya’s at the hands of brutal Myanmar Army. She is deliberately supporting the Myanmar Army to do ethnic cleansing of Muslims. The Neros of Islamic world like King Faisal, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Mohd Najib Abdul Razak, Pervez Ashraf and Civilian Dictator Zardari are all silent.They have faced decades of discrimination but the Muslim minority’s plight has garnered little international attention.They have been persecuted and discriminated against for decades but few can even pronounce their name let alone know of their plight.
“There is a lot of latent prejudice, racism, whatever you want to call it, inside Burma
towards this community and it’s playing out right now. It’s not over by any means.
It’s a tinderbox and it could blow up at any time.”
– Brad Adams from Human Rights Watch
“It is true that we are not Burmese. We are an independent state – Arakan.
And Rohingya is one of the races of Arakan not Burma …. They [the Burmese] are the ones who intervened, they are the ones who are foreigners [in] this land, they are the ones who invaded.”
– Muhammad Noor, a Rohingya political activist
Buddhist attacks on the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, have picked up over the last few weeks following the rape and murder of a Buddhist woman in May. Human rights groups say the security forces are also involved in the targeted attacks, which started in June. Thousands of Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh – but thousands more have been refused entry. For those who do make it across the border their troubles are far from over. An estimated 800,000 Rohingya live in Myanmar’s Rakhine state with another 200,000 in Bangladesh. They are not recognised by either country. Myanmar has long faced tensions with many of its ethnic minorities, and the new government has agreed to a ceasefire with many of the groups. But last week, Thein Sein, the president of Myanmar, told the UN that the solution was either to send millions of Rohingya to another country or to have the UN look after them.
“We will take responsibility for ethnic nationalities but it is not at all possible to recognise the illegal border-crossing Rohingya who are not of our ethnicity,” he said. He added that the conflict poses a threat to the democratic and economic reforms his government has launched, warning that: “Stability and peace, the democratisation process and the development of the country, which are in transition right now, could be severely affected and much would be lost.” Inside Story asks: Is the plight of the Rohingya being deliberately ignored? Why has the world turned a blind eye to them? Joining presenter Sami Zeidan to discuss this are guests: Justin Wintle, a historian and author of Perfect Hostage, a biography of Myanmar’s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi; Brad Adams, the executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division; Mohamed Noor, a Rohingya political activist; and Dina Madani of the Muslim Minorities and Communities Department at the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
“When the communal violence backlash hit the Rohingya in Rakhine state, Aung San Suu Kyi came out with expressions of sympathy for them, but so far she has said nothing about granting them the right of citizenship, and somebody’s got to do that in Myanmar.”
SBY Reacts to Plight of Myanmar’s Rohingya — With a Letter
Rangga Prakoso, Ismira Lutfia & Anita Rachman | August 06, 2012
A Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia protestor in front ofthe Merdeka Palace urges intervention on behalf of the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. (Antara Photo/Ardiansyah Indra Kumala)
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/indonesian-islamic-hard-liners-vow-jihad-for-myanmars-rohingyas/530406
Funny how he cannot intervene over Christians, Shia or the KPK/Police – but can poke his nose in here
Yudhoyono’s first statement on the issue on Saturday, following weeks of mounting calls from human rights activists, legislators and students for Indonesia to take a role in finding a solution, received a mixed reaction from observers.
Some claim that Yudhoyono is trying to find a balance between asserting Indonesia’s leadership in the region and preserving the momentum of Myanmar’s democratic reforms. Others argue that the president should meet Thein Sein immediately rather than merely send letters.
Myanmar and Indonesia are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and Indonesia says it has been instrumental in pushing the Myanmar junta to embrace democracy.
In a measured statement during a news conference at his private residence in Cikeas, Bogor, Yudhoyono first said that there had been no indication of genocide of Rohingya. He then expressed Indonesia’s hope that Myanmar would stop the attacks against the Rohingya, a mostly Muslim ethnic minority in Myanmar.
“My letter to Myanmar President Thein Sein expresses Indonesia’s hope that the Myanmar government will solve the Rohingya problem in the best way,” he said.
The president asked Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to continue Indonesia’s active diplomacy so that Myanmar would allow representatives from the United Nations, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and Asean to enter the conflict zone to find what really happened.
“My hope is that the OIC, UN, Asean, Indonesia and Myanmar can cooperate to find the best solution,” he said.
Predominantly Buddhist Myanmar does not recognize the Rohingya as citizens, saying they migrated from Bangladesh during British colonial rule. Bangladesh has also disavowed the group, saying it is Myanmar’s problem.
Amnesty International has reported that hundreds of Rohingyas have been killed, raped, beaten and arbitrarily arrested since Myanmar declared a state of emergency in northern Rakhine state, on the border with Bangladesh.
Yudhoyono said Indonesia could offer Myanmar expertise in solving conflicts between the Buddhist Rakhine and Muslim Rohingya because the country had ample experience in dealing with clashes between Muslims and Christians, such as in Ambon and Poso, Central Sulawesi.
“Just like when we dealt with communal conflict in Poso, Ambon and Aceh, we didn’t want foreign involvement in the cases. We also rejected allegations that we did not protect the minority. I think Myanmar can hear the criticism and act justly,” the president said.
Haris Azhar, a prominent human rights activist and coordinator of the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), however, suggested that the president should meet directly with Thein Sein.
Ahmad Qisai, an expert from the Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy, said Indonesia’s involvement in resolving this situation could boost its image.
Makmur Keliat of the University of Indonesia said Yudhoyono’s statement was only aimed at appeasing the public and the domestic media.
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
