Altaf Bhai assures President Zardari of MQM Support, now what is the future of Dr Qadri?
- Thread starter mohsinzaheer
- Start date
w-a-n-t-e-d-
Minister (2k+ posts)
meri punjabi sahi nahi.. ek punjabi kahawat arz hai
" Jithay Di Khoti Uthay He Aan Khiloti " (bigsmile)
" Jithay Di Khoti Uthay He Aan Khiloti " (bigsmile)
AhmadAli66
Banned
Everyone should realize that Dr Saab is not the enemy of Pakistan bur rather the savior of Pakistan, lets all unite against the corrupt electoral dictatorship system
The $60-Million Question
Aamir Qureshi / AFP
The final showdown between the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry‚ and the government‚ led by President Asif Ali Zardari‚ is nigh. On Sept. 27‚ the court gave the attorney-general until Oct. 13 to finally explain why his government is dragging its feet on implementing an earlier ruling: requesting Swiss authorities to reopen an old case against the president. What happens in court may determine whether Pakistan continues with democracy or reverts to equally familiar other options.
The case in Switzerland‚ initiated at the behest of the Nawaz Sharif government in 1998‚ centers on the allegation that Zardari and his late wife‚ Benazir Bhutto‚ may have squirreled away $60 million in kickbacks in Swiss bank accounts. In August 2003‚ a Swiss court convicted the first couple‚ in absentia‚ of money laundering. The sentences of six months’ suspended jail time‚ a fine of $100‚000‚ and the order that they return some $2 million to Pakistan’s government‚ were suspended on appeal.
In October 2007‚ in order to woo Bhutto and her Pakistan Peoples Party‚ the then president‚ Pervez Musharraf‚ issued an amnesty law that got rid of the Swiss case. In December 2009‚ the court struck down this National Reconciliation Ordinance‚ and demanded the reopening of all cases against Zardari and the return of $60 million. The court says it is being stonewalled by the government on the issue. Zardari supporters say the president is being persecuted. (It can’t help that Zardari did not want Chaudhry reinstated as the country’s top judge‚ but conceded last minute to popular pressure.)
As head of state‚ the Constitution grants the president immunity from prosecution. Zardari also enjoys “sovereign immunity” under international law and cannot be tried while in office. This is as clear to Aitzaz Ahsan‚ erstwhile friend and colleague of Zardari’s and architect of the popular campaign that got Chaudhry reinstated as chief justice‚ as it is to Daniel Zappelli‚ Switzerland’s prosecutor-general. “We can’t prosecute Mr. Zardari while he has immunity unless Pakistan lifts that immunity‚” he told Reuters in March. “And if he doesn’t have immunity‚ why don’t they try him in Pakistan?”
Reassured by Zappelli’s statements‚ some Zardari supporters feel the government should write to the Swiss to satisfy Chaudhry and the court. Government lawyers argue‚ convincingly‚ that any letter to this effect would be taken as Zardari voluntarily waiving immunity since he heads the party in government and since such a request would be made in his name. It is for this reason that Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani hit back at the letter-writing lobby by comparing the president to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui‚ the Pakistani neuroscientist convicted and recently sentenced in a New York court for the attempted murder of her U.S. interrogators. Gilani said his government is under fire for not having been able to stop Siddiqui's trial in the U.S.‚ and yet people want their country’s president tried in another foreign court.
The Supreme Court has made clear that it intends to seek the repatriation of the funds in the Swiss accounts. On Sept. 27‚ the court asked the government to present details of other closed foreign cases against Zardari as well. The court is also likely now to review Article 248 and examine the doctrine of presidential immunity as it is codified in the Constitution‚ and to determine whether past and present instances of alleged corruption constitute official acts.
With its attorney-general the only official authorized to communicate with Swiss authorities‚ the government has two choices now: it can continue to resist implementing the court’s order forcing a judicial review of the immunity provision in the Constitution‚ or it could write to the Swiss effectively voiding the Constitutional protection.
If the government does not heed the judge’s order‚ the Supreme Court has‚ at least in theory‚ the right under the Constitution to ask the military to help implement its orders. Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah tried this in 1997 when he asked Army chief Jehangir Karamat to side with him against the then prime minister Sharif. Karamat declined. Shah resigned soon thereafter‚ followed by Karamat. If it gets to that stage‚ this time the Army may have to act given the ability of lawyers to whip up protests. Whatever the outcome on Oct. 13‚ one thing is clear: the system will not remain paralyzed for long. Something’s going to give‚ and soon.
SOOFI is president of the Research Society for International Law, and an advocate at the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
The $60-Million Question
As president‚ can Zardari be tried?
By Ahmer Bilal Soofi | From the Oct. 11‚ 2010‚ issue
Aamir Qureshi / AFP
The final showdown between the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry‚ and the government‚ led by President Asif Ali Zardari‚ is nigh. On Sept. 27‚ the court gave the attorney-general until Oct. 13 to finally explain why his government is dragging its feet on implementing an earlier ruling: requesting Swiss authorities to reopen an old case against the president. What happens in court may determine whether Pakistan continues with democracy or reverts to equally familiar other options.
The case in Switzerland‚ initiated at the behest of the Nawaz Sharif government in 1998‚ centers on the allegation that Zardari and his late wife‚ Benazir Bhutto‚ may have squirreled away $60 million in kickbacks in Swiss bank accounts. In August 2003‚ a Swiss court convicted the first couple‚ in absentia‚ of money laundering. The sentences of six months’ suspended jail time‚ a fine of $100‚000‚ and the order that they return some $2 million to Pakistan’s government‚ were suspended on appeal.
In October 2007‚ in order to woo Bhutto and her Pakistan Peoples Party‚ the then president‚ Pervez Musharraf‚ issued an amnesty law that got rid of the Swiss case. In December 2009‚ the court struck down this National Reconciliation Ordinance‚ and demanded the reopening of all cases against Zardari and the return of $60 million. The court says it is being stonewalled by the government on the issue. Zardari supporters say the president is being persecuted. (It can’t help that Zardari did not want Chaudhry reinstated as the country’s top judge‚ but conceded last minute to popular pressure.)
As head of state‚ the Constitution grants the president immunity from prosecution. Zardari also enjoys “sovereign immunity” under international law and cannot be tried while in office. This is as clear to Aitzaz Ahsan‚ erstwhile friend and colleague of Zardari’s and architect of the popular campaign that got Chaudhry reinstated as chief justice‚ as it is to Daniel Zappelli‚ Switzerland’s prosecutor-general. “We can’t prosecute Mr. Zardari while he has immunity unless Pakistan lifts that immunity‚” he told Reuters in March. “And if he doesn’t have immunity‚ why don’t they try him in Pakistan?”
Reassured by Zappelli’s statements‚ some Zardari supporters feel the government should write to the Swiss to satisfy Chaudhry and the court. Government lawyers argue‚ convincingly‚ that any letter to this effect would be taken as Zardari voluntarily waiving immunity since he heads the party in government and since such a request would be made in his name. It is for this reason that Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani hit back at the letter-writing lobby by comparing the president to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui‚ the Pakistani neuroscientist convicted and recently sentenced in a New York court for the attempted murder of her U.S. interrogators. Gilani said his government is under fire for not having been able to stop Siddiqui's trial in the U.S.‚ and yet people want their country’s president tried in another foreign court.
The Supreme Court has made clear that it intends to seek the repatriation of the funds in the Swiss accounts. On Sept. 27‚ the court asked the government to present details of other closed foreign cases against Zardari as well. The court is also likely now to review Article 248 and examine the doctrine of presidential immunity as it is codified in the Constitution‚ and to determine whether past and present instances of alleged corruption constitute official acts.
With its attorney-general the only official authorized to communicate with Swiss authorities‚ the government has two choices now: it can continue to resist implementing the court’s order forcing a judicial review of the immunity provision in the Constitution‚ or it could write to the Swiss effectively voiding the Constitutional protection.
If the government does not heed the judge’s order‚ the Supreme Court has‚ at least in theory‚ the right under the Constitution to ask the military to help implement its orders. Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah tried this in 1997 when he asked Army chief Jehangir Karamat to side with him against the then prime minister Sharif. Karamat declined. Shah resigned soon thereafter‚ followed by Karamat. If it gets to that stage‚ this time the Army may have to act given the ability of lawyers to whip up protests. Whatever the outcome on Oct. 13‚ one thing is clear: the system will not remain paralyzed for long. Something’s going to give‚ and soon.
SOOFI is president of the Research Society for International Law, and an advocate at the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Star Gazer
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Re: ایم کیو ایم حکومت کی حمایت جاری رکھے گی
Hanstay hanstay bal per gaya hai!
Double faced, opportunistic, characterless, rubbish leadership of mqm is the prime reason for the shameful down ward trend of the party and embarrassment of the members.
I sympathies with mqm members.
Hanstay hanstay bal per gaya hai!
Double faced, opportunistic, characterless, rubbish leadership of mqm is the prime reason for the shameful down ward trend of the party and embarrassment of the members.
I sympathies with mqm members.
