Pak Tea House » Judiciary, Justice, Pakistan, Parliament » The decision to oust Prime Minister Gilani
The decision to oust Prime Minister Gilani
A few hours ago the Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that Yusuf Raza Gilani stands disqualified under 63(1) g of the Constitution. I have written extensively on this in many of my previous blog posts which may be found on this website. However I’d like to state some basic issues with this judgment in clear and unambiguous terms (sadly no one speaks in those in Pakistan:
1. The Supreme Court of Pakistan, in my legal opinion, is NOT vested with the authority under the constitution to dismiss the Prime Minister or over-rule the decisions of the Speaker i.e. Presiding Officer of the National Assembly whose decisions are his or her privilege and are covered by the parliamentary privilege clause.
2. Chief Justice of Pakistan/the entire Supreme Court of Pakistan has no authority to dictate to the Prime Minister of Pakistan on what to write to which foreign authority. That is an executive function and not a judicial function.
3. The Prime Minister was correct in obeying 248(2) of the Constitution above arbitrary dicta of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He has paid a terrible price for following the Constitution in its letter and spirit. My heart goes out to him.
4. By loosely wording the short order and disqualifying the Prime Minister from 26 April, 2012, the Chief Justice of Pakistan has opened up a whole new constitutional crisis for Pakistan. The status of the budget as well as the recent executive decisions of the cabinet are now under a shadow. The impact of this on the economy and uncertainty it will create will be terrible.
I am not a People’s Party supporter. However, here one must commend the PPP for the statesmanlike manner in which the party has accepted what is otherwise a monumental injustice to a Prime Minister who was unanimously elected as the leader of house in 2008 and for the crime of obeying the Constitution.
It is now important to acknowledge that we are no longer a democracy but a judiciary, where the whim and will of an unelected institution ostensibly carries more power than 180 million people.
Perhaps it is time to dispense with the pretence of parliament, prime minister and president and constitutionally empower the Chief Justice to act as all three. Wait why constitutionally empower him? The Chief Justice should pass a decree abolishing everything other than the supremacy of the Supreme Court.
Filed under: Judiciary, Justice, Pakistan, Parliament · Tags: Chief Justice, Pakistan, Prime Minister, Supreme COurt
129 Responses to "The decision to oust Prime Minister Gilani"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- Mohan
said Ex Paki,
Thanks vm for telling us the future of Af... - Mohan said Ex Paki,
Thanks vm for telling us the future of Af...
- Maggu
said Ex-paki, you wrong the Taliban. Why would they nee... - it is important to have the best golf shoes possible-spun1
said certainly like your website however you have to te... - kaalchakra
said Tajender, to their credit, TTP have played not a... - Ex-Paki
said Tajender,
muslim rulers absorb themselve in indian... - Ex-Paki said Maggu,
Only a narrow visioned person like you will...
- Ex-Paki said Maggu,
Only a narrow visioned person like you will...
- Marlene said I absolutely love your blog and find nearly all of...
- tajender said rex an interesting intructions from london to brit...
Its new theory I heard by pro-ppp .. If you elected from parliament than you are above the law. You are not bound to follow the court law, you can make jokes of court decisions. You can do political scoring on that… But no one should stop you, because you are elected!
A society based on islam will be a confused society. The only way “out” is more fascism-strongman politics. A kaliph or emir or sheikh is basically just that. What CJ is doing in Pakistan is just that.
A confused book being called god’s final word (after which he dies out), a confused god supposedly being the ultimate sovereign – and all that childish fairy-tale stuff.
And they wish to impose this on the whole of mankind.
YLH
As a lawyer you must not forget the old axiom that ” a judge never makes a wrong judgment”. You should also not forget that the SC was very lenient towards the accused and his truculent attorneys and you will admit that in normal course no lawyer, not even you, stand a chance to foul the decorum of the SC as they did,
.
Judiciary decides the rights and wrongs of the 180 M populace..it as well as the Parliament you are trying to butter up had decided against you, the Mirzai’s and declared you as non-Muslims. Thus you cannot term both the judiciary and the parliament for doing and declaring what you folks deserved. I am amazed why didn’t you, a couch lawer, failed to file a small writ in the PM case?? There is another chance for you to defend Malik Riyaz, a stooge of the govt, and prove your grit rather than foul this forum with your nonsensical pukings at this forum.
Me thinks this statement “Judiciary decides the rights and wrongs of the 180 M populace” is what YLH is saying is wrong. YLh, I agree with you. The role of the judiciary is to interpret the law and not make it.
It seems Pakiland is now turning into a tri-headed monster with only one head responsible to the people and the other two heads being extra-constitutional authorities.
You guys are verily f..
@ romain
Being elected does not mean one is law into himself. With less than 30 percent valid votes cast by the 180 M fools to elect the most corrupt parliamentarians in the history of Pakistan who else is going to oversee their wrongs to public??? Of course it is the judiciary which has to leash the evil doers. Supreme court is the highest forum to decide legal disputes of any nature and they did so in Gilani’s case. The case was not decided by one judge but by a bench. Parliament is NOT supreme and calling it supreme would be insult to democracy in the existence of most corrupt people at its helms of affairs. In my view the rule should be to disqualify any parliamentarian whose reputation is questionable and he has been accused of corruption or some other illegal act. There should be no need for a trial….or proving with evidence. Some thieves and killers cannot be brought to book soon,,,( note: the killers of Imran Farooq have not yet been caught even by the Scotland yard and the whole matter is yet under investigation ,,howver they did arrest suspects but later released them) the point is that DANDA is required to make the bogus parliamentarians straight who just babble and try to defeat law and justice through Mirjai-type of arguments and debates (technical grounds) rather than on the merit of the case. The rule is that legal matters should not be decided on ‘technical grounds” but on merit..this is what the SC has done and everybody in the country is happy over this except a handful of buffoons. Since now even the regime has accepted the judgment (the Mirjai’s should learn a lesson from this and respect the law and constitution of the country too) ,,,,this chapter is closed forever and it is hoped that no parliamentarian would try to defy and flaunt the orders of the SC in future. I am sure nobody even in India would have ventured to
flaunt and challenge the judgment of the Indian SC in such a case or in any case whatsoever.
And who bitte schön, is responsible for the interpretation of the Pakistan Consitution, if not the Supreme Court? And who bitte schön is responsible to carry out the orders of the Supreme Court, if not the excutive?
How could a Prime Minister of the country is tried in a court of law, if his immunity has not been rescinded by the Parliament before the trial?
Rex Minor
PS
PTH should avoid critic of the supreme court decision! This could be construed as contempt of court as well. Pakistan is facing a trial period once again; the legacy of Bhuttos, either we rule wih anarchy or anarchy rules with the military!
Why don’t you just stone him!!!!
Lady Guinevere
Question; Stone whom? Answer: Any and all of them! Pick a number!
Lady Guinevere
Stoning is halal only in certain serious crimes.
Man made constituion will never work in the house of Allah.
[...] Latif Hamdani, while writing in Pak Tea House, aptly sums it up: “Chief Justice of Pakistan is NOT vested with the authority under the [...]
[...] Latif Hamdani, while writing in Pak Tea House, aptly sums it up: “Chief Justice of Pakistan is NOT vested with the authority under the [...]
ahem,
can u tell me difference between mickky mouse and ganesh.
both are kuffar
its a fun way to actually understand things better so another one could be like – what is the difference between promised mehdi talking to djinns and Muhammed talking to djinns…
another one could be, what is the difference between Harry Potter flying on a stick and Muhammed flying on a donkey…
Being a doctor I know if I have to prescribe analgesics to a mother in labour, I give one dose to an ordinary patient and a much higher dose to a mother addicted to street drugs.
In a country like Pakistan with a strong past history of addiction, and where there is always a fear of relapse into that addiction, the executive or the elected government, needs to take in extra dose of good governance and strong leadership to be able to free oneself from the fears of re-addiction, or relapse.
To put them in straight words, in order to avoid Pakistan slipping into wrong hands of power again, the onus lies on the elected representative to show exemplary commitment to democracy, not through empty slogans but through real actions which are felt as a relief to the common man on ground. And when they have the masses on their back for a support, the other powers would have to think twice, thrice even more before they sabotage democracy.
But when under a constant threat of losing the democratic struggle, will they not mend their ways, how will they?
Your heart may be for this elected Prime Minister, not of the 180 million, who may have elected him and his ilk with a hope 4 years ago, but many of them are on streets protesting, and a lot more suffering in homes with more miseries than 4 years ago.
What will this longest serving elected PM be remembered for, home & abroad? For me, it will be his arrogant attitude towards his own disgruntled compatriots with an advice to ‘leave Pakistan’.
Well I might as just get up and leave Pakistan. Anyone want to stop me….oh wait!!!!
Douche!
Hi fellows: why not watch the unfolding Tamasha and enjoy the fun? The country has not fallen apart. This incident has obviously emboldened the Judiciary and it might tempt them to give a damning verdict against some future crime of a Pak general! Then the Judiciary will expect the civilian govt to bell the cat! Then we will see the fun as to what could happen! Or this may turn out to be a preparatory event to bring the Great Khan to become the next saviour!
So relax now
Kamath,
Good thinking! The next step for the SC would be to ask the next Prime Minister to initiate criminal investigations against Gillani &co, based on the info from Wikileak?
Rex Minor
Poor Gilani Sahib: He now remains barred from running for any public office for 5 years. He can’t even be appointed as an envoy to India or say Uganda. What would he do to earn a decent living. I am told, he has no other income. What a terrible price to pay for showing loyalty to others!
@ AKB
{{..Being elected does not mean one is law into himself. With less than 30 percent valid votes cast by the 180 M fools to elect the most corrupt parliamentarians in the history of Pakistan who else is going to oversee their wrongs to public..}}
Dear brother-in-Sunni-Islam! What are you saying? Istighfar karo bhai. Without realizing it, you are strengthening the hands of the Qadianis/Ahmadis. The verdict of the Parliament of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is “final” and above all. Don’t you realize that we are Muslims in Pakistan – thanks to the verdict of the Parliament. The Parliament is above all.
Istighfar karo. Tauba karo. Aik bakra sadaqa karo. Otherwise, Qadianis will question our parliamentary verdict.
@ Hamza Baloch
//…Its new theory I heard by pro-ppp .. If you elected from parliament than you are above the law. You are not bound to follow the court law, you can make jokes of court decisions. You can do political scoring on that… But no one should stop you, because you are elected!…//
That shows your ignorance of History. This is not a “new theory”. This is a 38-year old theory. In 1974, the Parliament declared that Ahmadis were not Muslims for the purposes of constitution and law. The Parliament’s decision, inspite of being irrational, illogical, against commonsense, in conflict with fundamental Human Rights and contravening the Quran and Hadith, was considered acceptable. So, this theory of the Parliament being above everything including God, is an old theory.
to tajender
Comparing micky mouse with tajender is more relevant. In this comparison micky mouse is clearly more honest, humane, intelligent, better informed, self-respecting and decent.
BTW : Ganesh and micky mouse like each other and Ganesh likes to read micky mouse comics and micky mouse likes to read Ganesh’s stories. And both of them are of the opinion that this tajender has a rowdy-deceiver mentality caused by his islamic upbringing.
First thing first – forcefully teach Arabic to Pakistanis so that they can realize the Islamic dream…without that Pakistan will keep moving in circles…
Yes, I want my primeminister back who guarantees my rights to leave the country.
Watch for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHr9i6ypKH4
I apologize for the ignorant comment I made here about PM Gilani……
I thank you for deleting it….. Here is why…
The Pakistan Prime Minister, Gilani, he just got fired and corporate owned mainstream media says not a word about he being the one who is pushing the UN for a ruling against the drone strikes. Amazing how the Western world is locked in such mental darkness, as if it was,
“Babylon, land of deepest shadow and deep darkness, where even light is like darkness.”
@YLH
It was impression that you knew law, the constitution and separation of powers. I was sorely mistaken.
You know that this democratic farce was started by famous NRO, signed by run away Mushy and PPP. You forget that NRO was not even supported by parliament and was eventually declared illegal. After that it was the responsibility of elected government to continue prosecution of cases covered by NRO. Zardari’s Swiss case where his conviction was under appeal was only one case.Prime Mister should have re-instituted all cases without court order.
There are many ramification of PM Gilani’s behavior:
1. Dereliction of duty
2. Obstruction of justice
3. Aiding and abetting criminal activity and protecting criminals
4. Trying to undermine the system by usurping court powers as defined in constitution.
Your shedding tears for democracy is unbecoming of of intelligent person. You know as any other fool that government is run by Zardari and not the parliament.
Stop misleading people, stay with your agenda of civilizing the brown people. You have good company from across the border.
By the way do visit and read comments in TOI regarding chief justice, you would get a shock of your life.
@Rex Minor
why don’t you tell us all if the SC’s orders were flouted in India or any other country? A case was more than properly heard by the SC and decided. the only choice for the PM was to comply with it rather than act as a sycophant and boot legger of his party. The ruling party PPP doesn’t represent the masses, all the 180M or so, but only a fraction of them. The PM should be loyal to his country not to his party or its vested interests.
Who doesn’t know about the criminal background of most parliamentarians?? Ali Baba and 40 thieves —ain’t not going to work!
.
Lady Guin….soon the masses will hang their rulers as they did elsewhere in socalled despotically ruled countries. It’s only a matter to time….
.
As for Mirjai’s, they have no future. They flouted the parliamentary decision and now flout the judicial decision. What are they upto??
The talibans will surely take good care of them….to see that they behaved like good murteds if they wanted to live in Pakistan any more!
Parvez
three cheers for giving a bogus lawyer, ylh a straight right on his chin!!
AB,
Supreme court decisions are not flouted in any democracy! Nor are the elected members usualy tried in courts without first annuling the immunity of the office they hold!
Pakistan is a special case; anything is possibe in this country. I guess the next one to come under the hammer is the Interior minister, Zardari being the last in row.
Rex Minor
PS
sorry, I meant AKB, not AB:
@Rex
What does immunity have to with democracy? What happened to equality before law? Only time I would support your position is in case of frivolous litigation.
Heads of states have immunity in international law and even that is becoming iffy.
arey!
Mickey mouse is a mouse. Ganesh is a humanoid god with an elephant’s head. As far as similarities go, neither of them can be quoted as propagating bigotry/intolerance/hatred/violence/unrest under ANY circumstance. Please give these two guys a break !
manoj/ahem,
the followers of ganesh are the biggest blood suckers of the world.thogh they do not eat muttan.but in dealings sucks every drop of blood from mans body.everyday we read their financial scam in papers.they are the biddest hater of humanity.
some of the hindus are bunch of jokers they can take any ugly carricature as their god.
manoj/ahem,
Have u hear about beef eating festeval in hyderabad india,
Beef is the food of Dalits. Our hardworking and working class people need the proteins. The leisure class Brahmins and Banias want to deny our basic food rights. They talk of their Gomata whom they worship. They want us to just like themselves drink the piss and eat the dung of Gomata. We have given a strong blow to the food imperialism by the beef festival and more of such things are going to follow.
i participated in the Beef festival and partook the delicious Beef biryani served. Each delicious morsel we ate was a body blow to the regressive Vedic culture and Brahminism. The day is not far away when the grass eating Brahmins will also start eating Beef just like their Vedic ancestors did.
Parvez,
The office of Prime Minister did not commit any crime nor was the subject of the trial. Mr Gillani, the occupier of the Prime Mnister Office, was the accused and therefore the Parliament in a working democracy is obliged to suspend the immunities of the office bearers so that investigations and legal proceedings can proceed against the individuals involved. The parliament must cancel the immunity of the President as well, before investigations can be undertaen either domesticaly or at international level.
In Germany we have witnessed the fall of the President, when the Prosecution Office requested the cancelling of Presidents immunity, so as to enable the prosecution Office to proceed with the investigations. The President of the republic resigned his office before the Parliament was able to disscuss the issue in the house.
Me Gillani and Mr Zardari have no moral grounds to occupy the office, regardless of their status with the public.
I agree with AKB, and am of the opinion that all office holders in the State are to serve the interests of 180 million people and not to serve their personal or political interests of the party. Pakistan needs reforms and restructuring of their colonial based institutions including judiciary and military. Paistan democracy in my opinion must be democratised to become the democracy for the people as well!!
Rex Minor
Me Gillani and Mr Zardari have no moral grounds to occupy the office, regardless of their status with the public.
execellent.i fully agree with u.
@ AKB
{{..As for Mirjai’s, they have no future. They flouted the parliamentary decision and now flout the judicial decision. What are they upto?? The talibans will surely take good care of them….to see that they behaved like good murteds if they wanted to live in Pakistan any more!..}}
Well said, brother-in-Sunni-Islam, well said. Masha Allah. You and I are the only truly Parliament-Certified Muslims on this blog. The rest of the visitors are either Mushriks, Kafirs or Munafiqs. The Parliament of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is supreme and whatever the Parliament says is final in this life and the next. If the Parliament says that the Ahmadis are not Muslims, they are not Muslims. If the Parliament says that Gillani is the Prime Minister, then Gillani is the Prime Minister. The only good thing I like about the Supreme Court of Pakistan, is their soft corner of great Muslims such as Sufi Muhammad and Hafiz Saeed and others. May Allah reward the Supreme Court for its services to the holy global cause of these groups.
Justice Katju who was a former judge of Indian Supreme Court says, Pakistan Supreme Court overstepped their boundaries!
Re: Pakistani Supreme Court has gone overboard, says Katjju
It has no right to dismiss a Prime Minister or overrule the constitutional immunity given to the President
When I was I was a student of law at Allahabad University, I had read of the British Constitutional principle ‘The King can do no wrong’. At that time I did not understand the significance of this principle and what it really meant. It was much later, when I was in law practice in the Allahabad High Court, that I understood its real significance.
The British were experienced and able administrators. They realized from their own long, historical experience that while everybody should be legally liable for his wrongs and made to face court proceedings for the same, the person at the apex of the whole constitutional system must be given total immunity from criminal proceedings, otherwise the system could not function. Hence the King of England must be given total immunity from criminal proceedings. Even if he commurder, dacoity, theft, or some other crime, the King cannot be dragged to court and made to face a trial.
One may ask why should the King be given this immunity when others are not? The answer is that in the practical world one does not deal with absolutes. The British were one of the most far sighted administrators the world has known. They realized that if the King is made to stand on the witness box or sent to jail, the system could not function. A stage is reached at the highest level of the system where total immunity to the person at the top has to be granted. This is the only practical view.
Following this principle in British constitutional law, almost every Constitution in the world has incorporated a provision giving total immunity to Presidents and Governors from criminal prosecution.
Thus, Section 248(2) of the Pakistani Constitution states:
“No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or Governor in any Court during his term of office.”
The language of the above provision is clear, and it is a settled principle of interpretation that when the language of a provision is clear the court should not twist or amend its language in the garb of interpretation, but read it as it is.
I therefore fail to understand how proceedings on corruption charges (which are clearly of a criminal nature) can be instituted or continued against the Pakistani President.
Moreover, how can the court remove a Prime Minister? This is unheard of in a democracy. The Prime Minister holds office as long he has the confidence of Parliament, not the confidence of the Supreme Court.
I regret to say that the Pakistani Supreme Court, particularly its Chief Justice, has been showing utter lack of restraint. This is not expected of superior courts. In fact the court and its Chief Justice have been playing to the galleries for long. It has clearly gone overboard and flouted all canons of constitutional jurisprudence.
The Constitution establishes a delicate balance of power, and each of the three organs of the state — the legislature, the executive and the judiciary – must respect each other and not encroach into each other’s domain, otherwise the system cannot function. It seems to me that the Pakistani Supreme Court has lost its balance and gone berserk. If it does not now come to its senses I am afraid the day is not far off when the Constitution will collapse, and the blame will squarely lie with the court, and particularly its Chief Justice.
(Justice Markandey Katju is a former Judge, Supreme Court of India. He is currently Chairman, Press Council of India)
My comments: but then this is the opinion of an Indian judge! …….”
Sorry I did not include one more sentence! Who knows? All this Tamasha perhaps , is part of an evolving democracy in Pakistan. At least it is gratifying to note that change of government is taking place in a democratic fashion rather than resorting to coups and guns,
A warning! If the court decides in the future to press the next Pak Prime Minister to go after Zardari again, there will be lots of fire-crackers bursting around in Pak. Capital.
Wa Salaam
Kamath,
What former Justice Katju said is his personal opinion, not a legal opinion! In Pakistan there is no higher authority than the Supreme Court which is also the Constitutional court. The authority which interprets the laws is vested in them and in case of non clarity in their view, the Supreme Court has the duty to send back the legislation to the legislators declaring null and void until the legislatorshave revised it!
The story of King is a fairy story as well, No individual in the UK is above the law, including the monarchy. The King can be compelled to abdicate and this has occured in British history.
Look at it in pracicle terms, who in your opinion or in the opinion of retired justice Katju, has the authority to overturn the decision made by the Pakistan Supreme Court??? the Queen of England as the head of the commonwealth? Do you reckon that even in the somewhat lawless country of USA, the administration or the legislators can turn down the decision of the supreme Court?
Rex Minor
PS
I shall be anxious to know if there has been a precedence in India or USA of Supreme court rulings being turned down by the administrations? This would be the direct invitation for a military take over, and believe you me if this occurs in Pakstan once again, there shall be no more exiles but the civiian leaders are very likely to be tried for treason against the State.
Returning to the certified musims in Pakistan, there appears to be some hope in case the Ahmedies have not yet filed a petition to the Supreme Court? The legislators in the parliament have no competence to define who is a genuine or non-genuine muslim citizen? The current chief Justice appears to be a serious guy in his profession.
Rex Minor
A society that takes Mohammad’s god-concept and so-called revelation book as its sovereign and highest authority and law – it is trying to live in a 7th century tribalism-type makkan caliphate. Since this “revelation” book contains ambiguities, contradictions, inconsistencies and even mistakes and idiocies hence such a society is bound to end up in violence and violence-glorification, and only the violence-doers will dictate terms in it.
This is not a personal opinion but an objectively demonstrated and well-proved fact about islam-based or muslim-majority societies. Muslim denials and abuses, shrieks and screams, threats and bribes will change nothing on that. The more the muslims deny this, the more they will slide down into fascism and self-deceit.
@ Kamath
{..but then this is the opinion of an Indian judge..}
Justice Markandey Katju is not a Parliament-certified Muslim of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. So his opinion can not be quoted before us Parliament-certified Muslims, even if the opinion be correct per se. I am sure AKB will add to my argument.
Kamath:
Everything you and the YLH article above) assert is technically correct. However when it comes to an impartial assessment as to who damaged the constitutitonal checks and balances in Pakistan, there are more than one guilty parties.
.
The Westminister style parliamentary democracy has checks and balances but it rests in a large part on the good faith of all the participants who are expected to follow the rules not only in letter but also in spirit.
.
In the spirit of parliamentary system the Presidency is supposed to act as an independant office; seperate from the executive.
The spirit was destroyed a long time ago when the Presidency was occupied by the President of the party in office.
Second; the parliamentary system works best where there is collective responsibility of all to keep the system from breaking down. Then there is an implied responsibility; not only legal but moral.
.
Due to this it is expected that a Minister, or the head of the State avoids precipitating a constitutional crisis rather than hiding behind technicalities.
.
In the present system it could have been done several ways.
1. The President, if he is indeed innocent; could have resigned his office, and stood trial (with a sympathetic Govt. in office, this was his best chance)
2. Once the PM was indicted, he could have stepped down on his own.
3. The Govt. could have recommended to dissolve the parliament and go back to the people.
.
Because none of this happened; the second pillar of Govt. is now going down as well. The Judiciary indeed appears to have stepped way beyond its limits.
This is how the checks and balances breakdown.
In the process, the entire sordid saga has given a black name to the very Democracy itself.
One hopes that the damage may remain limited to Pakistan though don’t be surprised if it is also noted in the coming years in the emerging democracies in the Muslim world like Iraq and Afghanistan…
Rex
Thanks for explaining your position on immunity. Queen of England is a special case, as she is head of Church and a head of state. This is contradiction in itself in a secular country.
The case of Ahmedies is lot more political while theological consensus is against them. It was consummate lefty ZA Bhutto who made this part of the constitution. Problem with Ahmadies is that they were hand in gloves with colonial British to lay the foundation of divide and rule. The case of Iranian Bhais is not all that different. These groups seek political power and road to that is cruel and bloody.
Let me mention the case of Sikhs in India, as they sit in the middle ground between Hinduism and Islam. They do not claim to be Muslim or Hindus. Muslims have no problem with them but Hindus take on them is rather ambiguous. The claim is that they are Hindus but constantly try to pull them back into traditional practices. Their history is heroic, sad and bloody. Go figure.
Though not directly connected to the present crisis, I reproduce an excerpt from the novel ‘The K Word: Make Peace Not War’, which aptly describes the unfolding of similar political drama in Pakistan.
” General Sayani woke up to the news of his replacement by third-in-command Abbas Mukhtar Khan. Finding his telephone connection dead, he got enraged. Seething with anger, he decided to go out and find out what exactly was happening but was stopped by the armed guards posted at his gate. He was shocked to see a different set of men guarding his official residence. Slowly, the reality dawned upon him. “Zafari had been quick in his move and pre-empted my move of a coup,” he mumbled as he walked back to his room.
……………
……………
In the early morning meeting with President Zafari, Gul Mohammed Haque realised that he was sitting in front of a determined statesman: one who has made up his mind firmly. He knew that General Sayani has been replaced and put under house arrest without any warning. It was his personal friendship with Zafari, that he – Gul, was being given a fair chance, either to make a comfortable living in the United Arab Emirates, obviously meaning exile, or work with him for a better Pakistan. He found the thought ridiculous and couldn’t help smiling.
‘A better Pakistan!’
He knew that the entire political class, the entire army and the entire intelligence agency have all become so power greedy and so corrupt that the very idea of straight governance and working for the welfare of the people, and for the country at large, was almost like a little child asking for moon. Yet, he felt, there would be some adventure in being a part of this impossible mission. He decided to cooperate.
Parve,
You have mentioned a number of points now beyond the subject of immunity.
There is no contridiction in the UK between the church and the Govt., each functioning independent of each other, the Queen being the nominal head of both institutions.
Islam does not allow ex-communication of any person who claims to be a muslim. No one and I mean no human scholar has the right to act on behalf of God almighty to certify or deny muslim legitimacy of a person. Every individua who commits to the main tenets of Islam must be deemed as muslims. God alone has the authority and shall decide wheather an individual is a true believer or not a true believer.
The opinion of Islamic scholars is not binding for any one, let alone a Govt.! They must all account for their Fatwas to God almighty, as I must account for my opinion; may God forgive me.
Religion and politics are not compatible and usualy create a chemical reaction; the history is full of examples.
Hinduism is not a religion and should be so regarded and judged on their practices. Unlike the Ibrahimic religions, they do not recognise a super human authority which demands worship and obedience. Their leaders appear to be becoming flexible and now accept atheists and agnostics among them and in my opinion it is a matter of time when they would be ready to integrate the ONE God concept as part of Hinduism.
Sikhism in my view is an anomoly, totaly indoctrinated by their leaders, and followers of a mythology, some basic rules the key one being that Khalsa must never remove hairs from the body which shall enable him to overpower the enemy- the MUSLMS. A whole nation of SAMSONS! This is more compatible with Greek and Hindu mythologies and almost match the legend of King arthur and Merlin!
Rex Minor