Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
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 Announcement on November 2nd, 2012
A Plea to Young Pakistanis
Please
Save Pakistan From Mediocre Leaders in All Fields of Human Endeavor
Let
Unity, Faith, Discipline
be your guide
and
be
Honest to the Core
Pride of Our Rich History and Strong Humanitarian Principles Embedded in Our Islamic Heritage
Pakistan Think Tank has been redesigned to serve the Sohni Dharti. Pakistan is our beginning, middle, and our final destination, without Pakistan, we have no identity. This website serves the cause of Pakistan. A moderate, responsible, and a progressive nation in the global community. We do not discriminate based on gender, caste,creed, race, and political ideology. We are not affiliated with any political party, except, we reflect the inner core of ideas, which gave birth to the nation of Pakistan. We reflect what ideas are encapsulated in the hearts and minds of 180 million Pakistanis. If you visit our site, come with an open mind. Be a CRITICAL THINKER.
We believe in the Principles on which Quaid-e-Azam laid the foundation of Pakistan. We provide a forum for voices of Pakistanis to be heard, globally. We project the real image of Pakistan. We bring to the global community: the Thoughts, Dreams, and Aspirations of Pakistanis. We debunk the the tsunami of propaganda to demonize Pakistan and its people. We abhor all forms of Extremism, both of the West and the East. Pakistan is a nation of moderates. It is a nation of dreamers. Pakistanis bicker, create mayhem, but, when it comes to identity, we are NOT, Baluchis, Punjabis, Pashtuns, and Sindhis, we are all Creations of Al-Fateer, Ar-Rahman, Ar-Rahim, Our One and only Creator. our Awal, our Akhir, our Zahir, and our Batin. And, we are ALL PAKISTANIS, striving to build a nation in a sea of hostile forces and region
.
We are part of a family called, the Family of Man. Our identity is our faith. We are Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Parsees, Jews, Jains, and Buddhists. We fight the negative and false image of a modern Pakistan, projected by its enemies. We serve Pakistan in all its glory and showcase, its foundational principles, critical thinkers, religious scholars, academics, overall we provide a rainbow of opinions and perspectives. We project ideas against the demonic forces of extremism and violence. IQRA is our guiding principle with knowledge and critical thinking Pakistan can move forward. As the exhortation on the building of Dyal Singh College University says, we: Gather ye the wisdom of East and West. And we ascribe to the ideology laid down in Quaid-e-Azam’s speech of August 11, 1947.
The Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah during his first address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on 11th August, 1947 said:
“We are all citizens and equal citizens of one state….Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal, and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”1
Those who do not have full grasp of the Two-Nation Theory are often misled by the phrase used by the Quaid when he said, “Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims.” They wrongly infer from these words that the Quaid’s vision of Pakistan was that of a secular state in which religion would have no role to play. In this way they mistakenly by wish to hoodwink the people that with the creation of Pakistan the Quaid had given up his affiliation with the Ideology of Islam which he so vehemently asserted before the creation of Pakistan. This mistaken view has already witnessed dangerous interpretations. Therefore, it is not surprising when people of much high caliber as Mr. Justice Mohammad Munir, the former Chief Justice of Pakistan, in his book from Jinnah to Zia while referring to the said speech of the Quaid has observed:
“The pattern of Government which the Quaid-i-Azam had in mind was a secular democratic government.”2
The pre-political phase of the Two-Nation Theory should not be confused with its post-political era. Evidentially, before the creation of an Islamic State, the Muslims and the non-Muslims are two different and distinct nations. The Muslims, in every respect, are a nation, irrespective and independent of geographical boundaries and racial or linguistic bonds. Their religion governs them in every walk of life. In their socio-economic solidarity they have not to be dependent on the state legislation. State legislation is just transcendence of the comprehensive and complete code of life laid down by the Holy Quran and the Holy Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam).
Islam provides intellectual foundation for the institutional organization of mankind; whereas territorial nationalism based on geographic, linguistic and racial affinities lead to spiritual paralysis and material superiorities of colour, language, territory, tribe and heritage. Territorial nationalism makes impossible the universal brotherhood of mankind. The motto of Muslim Nationhood in the expression of the Unity of God (Taied-e-Ilahi) in thought and action in accordance with the Will of God. Despite everything else the word country (watan) as a term of Geography is not contrary to Islam. Love of Motherland is a natural sentiment. But when the word country is used as a concept of Political Science, it comes into conflict with Islam, for Islam is itself a comprehensive principle of institutional organization.
When the Muslims succeed in establishing a sovereign Islamic State, a change takes place in the political status of the Muslim and the non-Muslim citizens of the Islamic State. Both of them are full citizens of the State. The non-Muslims are not the second grade citizens of the Islamic State. In a secular state the rights of the minorities are a bounty of the ruling majority. But in the Islamic State the rights of the non-Muslims are bestowed upon them by the Holy Quran and the Holy Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam). In this regard the rights of non-Muslim citizens are protected by the ‘Shariah’ which is the fountain head of all matters for the Muslim rulers of an Islamic State. In the terminology of the International law and Political Science this is called Pluralism.
The Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah is therefore, rightly following in the footsteps of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam) when before the Independence he asserted with his thundering voice that the Muslims of the sub-continent are a different nation altogether. And when, with the grace of Allah, he succeeded in establishing a sovereign Muslim State, he declared in his address to the Constituent Assembly that the non-Muslims would be as good and privileged citizens of the State as the Muslim citizens. The words “in the political sense as citizens of the State” occurring in the Quaid’s speech are significant and self-explanatory.
The Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam) treated the Muslims of Arabia as a different nation from the non-Muslim Arabs. When he established a sovereign Muslim State of Madina, he enforced ‘Mithaq al-Madina’ as the first Constitution of the first Islamic State. In this constitutional document the Jews of Madina were given the same status as citizens which was given by the Quaid-i-Azam to the Hindus and other minorities of Pakistan. The Article No.1 of the Mithaq al-Madina runs as,
“They (the Muslims and the Jews of Madina) constitute a single community distinct from the other people.”
The famous orientalist Montgomery Watt fell into the similar fallacy about the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam). In his book Muhammad At Medina he has misread Article No.1 of the Mithaq al – Madina and he has wrongly inferred that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam) wanted to establish a secular state. He writes:
“This suggests that the Ummah (Ummat al-Muslima) is no longer a purely religious community.”3
Montgomery Watt has not read the Mithaq al-Madina as an organic whole and therefore has drawn an unsustainable conclusion. He has ignored Article 42 of the Mithaq al-Madina (the Constitution of the State of Madina) which inter alia states:
“Whenever among the people of this document there occurs any incident or quarrel from which disaster for it (the people) is to be feared, it is to be referred to Allah (Subhanahu wata-ala) and to Muhammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam) the Messenger of Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’ala). Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the most scrupulous and truest of what is in this document.”4
This Article clearly stipulates the supremacy of Allah and the Holy Prophet which means that the ‘Shariah’ shall be the supreme law of the State of Madina. When Article No.1 and Article No. 42 are read together it necessarily implies that the Holy Quran and the Holy Sunnah shall be the supreme law of the land. The Muslims as well as the non-Muslims shall be the equal citizens under the umbrella of the ‘Shariah’. Every citizen whether she/he is a Muslim or a Jew shall follow his/her respective obligation as enjoined by the ‘Shariah’. Politically they constitute one community. Their religious differences recede to the level of personal affairs. This is exactly what the Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah wanted to convey to the Nation in his historical address of 11th August, 1947 to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan.
We can, therefore, safely conclude that this misconception thus created seems to be an act of extreme injustice, aimed at distorting the real version of the Quaid’s speech and impute secularism and separation of politics from religion to Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, when he actually did not mean it. It is intellectual dishonesty and a worst kind of distortion in utter disregard of the context of the speech and the context of all other statements and speeches of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Even, in this speech he has advocated the integration of religion and politics in the light of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (Sall Allah ho alaihe wa sallam).
By Farhat Gulzar & Riaz-ul-Hassan Silani
Reference: Pakistan Vision (Quaid-i-Azam Number) Vol. II, Nos. 1 & 2 Jan-Jul 2001
Publisher: Pakistan Study Centre, University of the Punjab, Lahore. 2001
REFERENCES
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Latest on December 19th, 2009
UQAAB, The Pakistan Think Tank invites Pakistanis and Non-Pakistanis
All Pakistanis, Friends of Pakistan, and Global Community members are freely and openly are invited to write articles for Pakistan Think Tank.
If you are interested in contributing articles or commentary to Pakistan Think Tank, please email your articles or commentary along with related images and photos to our editor at
We look forward to hearing from you. We welcome articles from the global community.
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
