constitutional package OR unconstitutional packaging of vicious intentions
submitted 5 months 28 days 1 hour ago by: mianjee : 28 comments
Finally the world famous and well waited constitutional package came in..With so many flaws that it seems Zardari tryign to hide his vicious intentions with good wraping of constitution..A few of them as given below:
1-CJ job tenure will be 3 years:
thus Iftikhar Ch will be retired on 29th may 2008..A better way to get rid of CJ who can challange NRO
2-58/2B will be taken back from President::
We can see through out of our history that whenever 58/2b was not with president, the elected Govt looted country well because there was no one to take a measure against their foolish policies...In the result People came on roads and Army chief got a point to occupy the country...When there will be no 58/2b with President and no active CJ will be there to challange vicious steps of Govt.
3- Parliment will be supreme authority whose step would not be challangable
it means if parliment wants it can ammend consitution in any way and it cant be challanged in teh court becasue 345 foolish accpeted it???
4-All judges will face the music as they accpted PCO
Why there is no mentioning of those politicians who always sit in General's lap?? Even BB made a deal with a dictator , was it not a betrayl with country and constitution.???
There many other points in that package....They are here to save the country or to become super power??
Comments
Excellent points mianjee
It surely is a way to be above the law. Since public is so much against the Dictator Rule, these parasites are taking full advantage by completely shifting the power from one monkey to the other idiot.
May God have mercy on us.
Isn't superiority of parliement what democracy is all about? What did I miss here?
Plant a tree
amer bhai: thanx for appreciation and contribution
Babar:
Democracy doesnt refer to un-challanged powers of parliment...If in US they can challange decisions of Bush Administration then why here they are going to paralyze judiciary??? IF there will be no check on parliment then how you can make Govt change its wrong policies??? You know that we have more than 300 memebrs who dont understand constitution well.....
If you think that opposition in the parliment can guide Govt then you are wrong..Govt never listens to opposition in pak. The opposition will remain in Walk outs, press confrence, point of orders and attention notice but no one will care for them and they will impose their policies.
ONE OTHER POINT WHICH I MISSED : IF PRIME MINISTER WILL SELECT CHIEF Of ARMED FORCES:
then chief of forces will be politically selected...like a soverign parliment of nawaz selected Pervez musharaf by bypassing Ali Quli. It was a political gumble in which nawaz lost.
earliar , Mr Bhutto selected Zia just becasue of political reasons, though he hanged him.
Before that Ayub khan was selected due to political reasons and in result we saw 1st army rule
Isn't superiority of parliement what democracy is all about? What did I miss here?
Pretty much the whole train.
It's about each branch of government checking the power of the other
Mainjee
Your detailed response is much appreciated. Thanks I am convinced.
Plant a tree
P.S. What is your take on National security council (NSC)?
Do you think that is a possible mean to require end?
Good convincing arguments, mainjee.!
babar:
As NSC is uncontitutional body so either it should be introduced in by ammendment with consent of all political parties or shoudl be disolved , but Who will retain it when all are trying to get ALL IN ALL powers of PM???My opinion is that this body shoudl be disolved.
58/2b Should remain with president but president should not be able to use it without consent of a body...This body may be consist of Cheif justice, Army cheif, President himself , PM, one sentaor of rulign party and oen senator of opposition party and 4 justices of high courts(one from every province)..If this body commes to a point that Govt is failed to maintain law and order and economical conditions then they should reccomend president to disolve it..This decision should not be made with out two third majority of all memebers of committee.You can say that it is an advanced form of NSC..
"This body may be consist of Cheif justice, Army cheif, President himself , PM, one sentaor of ...."
Army Chief ?!!!
Let's not give any say in the government to the army, please!
All pillars of state must have equal representation. Dissolving an assembly
can have a number of reasons including judicial, defense, economical or foreign
diplomacy issues. Only an all round council can ensure that a sound decision is
made.
Furthermore, transparency must be made mandatory. If decision of every
individual in NSC is detailed and written public document, this can ensure some
transparency. In case the decision is challenged in Supreme Court, every member
of the council must personally defend their written statements. Plus
all court preceding must be made open to public through state and private media.
All this sounds like a distant dream though
Plant a tree
KHALIFAH:
BABAR is quite right.. Army is one of the stake holders..We need their representation becasue every time they occupy country with excuse of Law and order situation..If Army chief will eb sitting in a forum , he will be liable to justify any of army activity..
Moreover, we need army chief in that forum becasue President always uses 58/2b when army is on his back..But when Army chief will be there to intract with civilians then he will eb careful about his relation with presidnet..
Babar : I totally agree with your "written Verdict suggestion"...Thus they will be liable of their opinion
Yes, but is it correct to include the army in the government because we fear those bastards?
Will you let your chokidar live and sleep in your house because he has a gun and you are afraid of him.
Democracy assumes "your boat" is still afloat and you want to ensure it does not sink. So you delegate authority to the parliment. In case of boats that have already been sunk: There is another democracy its called civil war.
Khalifah, my family has been victim of Zia's regime. My
father and both grandparents have spent months in political imprisonment, at
more then single instance. My uncle was tortured – 16 lashes at age of 16yrs,
only because he was protesting against Zia. There are so many facts that my family and family friends can tell to amaze you.
But yet all of us (including my 16 lash uncle) feel that
army is a key stakeholder – we cannot judge the entire institution because at
one point dictator like Zia was its chief. After all, army officers are people like you and me. It is an institution
of loyal Pakistanis, such as ourselves. These solders are willing to give lives for our country. How can we
curse them?
Plant a tree
You are just regurgitating the propaganda that the army has been spoon feeding you, very effectively, I may add. Which nations other than our sister failed states allow the army to have a stake in matters of governance?
Secondly the statement that the soldiers are willing to give their lives for our country is another very effectively propagated myth. Pakistani soldiers have a history of brutality (Bangladesh) and incompetence (the army has not won a single war), not bravery. When they do fight, they fight not for Pakistan but for the privileges that they have become accustomed to
Curse them?, surely, I say, may God damn them all, Amen
Khalifah: Seriously man, do you happen to live in Torraborra?
BTW I have a cousins living in Bangladash. I have learn't quite a bit from him on Bdash society. Perhaps at another forum we can have debate on that issue too.
Plant a tree
Khalifah:
We cant judge about some one's Niyyat, We cant tear apart his heart to check..
I dont think some one can penetrate under the tanks to blow hismelf up in order to get previlage..If some one will die how he will enjoy the previlages??If i offer you million rupess would you be able to do what is done by Aziz Bhatti or Mjaor tufail or Shair khan or SCDRN LD: Rafeqi???
Armed forces always have brutal nature becasue for them force is every thing..If amry in BD showed brutality then what you say aboutMUKTI BAHNI's killing of 10,000 pro-pakistan muslim league and Jamat-e-Islami(al-badar and alshams)???
We want army in decision makers because it is one of the state organs:
PM will represent Parliment
President will represent State
Judges will represent judiciary
Then who will represent Executive??? a 19th grade secratory??? Of course a General will be a better representative of Executive and establishment..
"Then who will represent Executive"
The Presidency is the executive
"what you say aboutMUKTI BAHNI's killing of 10,000 pro-pakistan muslim league and Jamat-e-Islami(al-badar and alshams)???"
How does that absolve the Pakistani army of what they did? Countless rapes, murder of innocent civilians and wholescale destruction?
"I have learn't quite a bit from him on Bdash society"
Are you trying to imply that they deserved what they got?
"Khalifah: Seriously man, do you happen to live in Torraborra? "
No, seriously man, I happen to believe that people should be accountable for their actions and that it is NOT acceptable to have the army OWN and DESTROY the country which it was suppposed to protect
President is representatiev of the state , not of govt.
"I have leant quite a bit from him on Bdash society"
Are you trying to imply that they deserved what they got?
No
I am only implying that Bdash was always a different country (since 1947) - different people and therefore this division was inevitable. It was sad that it happened in such cruel way.
Let me quote few examples to elaborate differences:
- They hate Mohammad Ali Jinnah only because he introduced Urdu as national language. They believed that Bangali should be national language for Pakistan. It is parallel to saying that Punjabi or Sindhi should be national language - I don't think even a Punjabi or Sindhi would agree if someone wants to impose their language on rest of Pakistan. Urdu in this case was the only neutral language which was acceptable to everyone as a common language to communicate with each other.
- Unlike rest of us they were always more nationalists. They could not and would not surrender there identity as Bangali to become Pakistanis. Rest of Pakistan is not as keen on clans and tribes as they were. E.g. my wife is a Baloch (a very proud one) yet she considers herself Pakistani first. I am a Punjabi but more then that I consider myself as Pakistani. This was not the case in Bangladesh.
- There are at least four Marshall Laws so far in Pakistan and a couple in Bangladesh since it has separated. If a General in army for whatever reason tells Benazir Bhutto that she cannot be PM and make Ch Sujjahat or Zafar-ullah Jamali PM. Instead of calling for separation of Sindh she will struggle to fight dictatorship as a Pakistani (not Sindhi). And let me remind you that when her father was hanged she could have exploited the sentiments to do just the same what Bdashis did in 74.
There are many more difference, this is only a start. The only point I am trying to make here is that B'dash was a separate country, a different nation from the very start. No Pakistani can be blamed for there separation because they were always separate. It was a blunder to make them part of Pakistan where they should have been a seperate country.
Plant a tree
Are you turning a blind eye to the real problems that the Bengali's faced and the exploitation they were suffering at the hands of West Pakistan? Language was just one of many issues; East Pakistan was more populous but its share in the government was dwarfed by that of Punjab which contained a fraction of the Bengali population. Creation of Bangladesh was not inevitable but was neccesitated by the repressive policies of WP; the Bengali's unlike their counterparts, being fiercly independent, plain refused to accept WP hegemony
Babar:
What do you say about nomination of Liaqat Ali instead of Khawaja Nazim Uddin who was a representative of East pakistan? They had more population so PM was supposed to be from their area...
Khalifah: It is cant be denied that west pakistan deprived them but it should not have been done with that cruel way at all.
Khalifah
Are you implying that you know more about Bangladesh
and its historical differences with Pakistan
then Bangladeshis themselves? Come on man your argument is based on hate for Pak-army
more then logic or understanding of the issue. Least once every month I meet 4
Bangladeshis (1 my cousin and 3 his friends). Some times we talk about history
between our two countries in a very respectful manner. Fortunately they do not
share your understanding.
Let me explain things to you a bit more clearly this time.
Firstly, what happened in Bangladesh
in 74 had a big historical context. Since 47 people at east and west had
differences. Sometimes people from east were unfair and at others people from
west were unfair. But all said and done, separation was inevitable as we were
always two separate nations. We had nothing in common and therefore many
misunderstandings were rooted in natural differences.
Secondly my Bangladeshi cousin himself has admitted that most
of the killings in 74 were conducted by Bangladeshi, anti-separation Mullas
rather then Pak-army. These Mullas are to date major players in Bangladeshi
politics. 10,000 freedom fighters were trained by Indian RAW and 400,000 Indian
solders marched into Bangladesh
to occupy territory which only 99 thousand Pakistani solders were trying to
secure. Neither India
nor Bangladesh
officially admit these facts.
Now please do not consider me being devils advocate here. I
can share with you that my family including dad, grandpa and grandma (all
Punjabis) were on streets protesting AGAINST army operation in 74. They were
labeled as traitors and were subjected to lathi charge. In this context I can
tell you that I have full sympathies with victims of 74. However, I refuse
to be irrational and unreasonable in creating assertion about Pak-army.
I have one personal and friendly suggestion for you to
conclude my part of this debate. Please stop seeing world in black and white.
Issues are far more complicated then your rather simplistic approach.
Plant a tree
BABAR :
Is it 71 or 74?
Moreover , You are sayign them freedom fighter who were foreign trained..amazing.You yourself wrote that India trained 10,000 freedom fighters..We cant accept foreign trained people as freedom fighter.
You are saying mullah to them who were side by side with pak army with name of albadr and alshams...
One mans terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.
What difference does labels make? btw we also trained Sikh and Kashmiri separatist
a.k.a freedom fighters. One can't just blame India
alone for ugly tactics. This is a norm in warfare.
& yes Bangali Mullah's were engaged in most
of killings - again labels are meaningless.
Plant a tree
BABAR:
A person labels groups on the basis of his own idology or his own liking..As i am a pakistani so for me who goes against my state is a traitor and who is in the favour is a patriot..
If you take a plea that some can go against the state becasue of his depriveness then i dont agree. Becasue when you are deprived by your family memebers do you try to kill any oen of them or do you try to disintegrate your home? You willnot so how can i accpet Bengalies or baloch or Waziristan fighters as patriot..
If Bengolies were deprived they were also responsible to select toothless leaders who remained a part of establishment and partners with depriving elite.
You know when your beloved pak army had surrendered who fought against Mukti Bahni??? Those whom you are saying MULLAH...your brave army had surrendered with divisions of armed personale (93000). The world's largets number of captured soldiers
Nice arguments, Babar
So I should toss away all the history books on this conflict and contact your coursin and his friends for info. Darn, can't believe I wasted my time reading those books when enlightenment was only a phone call away
Khalifah
Other debate is removed so I have posted my answer to your questions as follow:
Khalifah: Bull crap; if today America or Australia opened immigration for Pakistanis, all and I repeat, ALL 160 million, including you, would migrate
BTW I am in Australia at the moment. They are offering me immigration but I intend to come back home. At least one part of your argument is proven wrong my angry friend. You are entitled to your opinion but please do not generalize your discontent for Pakistan.
Khalifah: I live in America, have never been discriminated against, and have been amply rewarded for my hard work.
Race may not be an issue in your State but how would you explain Kentucky voting patterns for democratic candidate Barrack Obama. At least in State of Kentucky, surveys showed that people voted for Clinton because Obama’s is half black. Can you lease also explain why his middle name ‘Hussein’ is a big issue among voters? He has also been called Obama-bin-laden, why so?
However, I do not consider US as a racist society. Majority people are reasonable but a minority does discriminate.
Plant a tree
Mainjee,
Pakistan is my country and I love Pakistan. But Pakistan is not right all the time. With your permission I would like to treat Balochistan and Bangladesh issues separately. The conclusion is however same.
Let’s take Balochistan first. I can assure you that majority in Balochistan are loyal to Pakistan and they do not want separation. Having said that, we shell not let a minority separatists dictate terms to a big majority of Baloch population. This is the rational for Balochistan operation.
On the contrary, most of Bangladeshi population wanted a separate state and hence minority “Mulla” had no right to dictate terms on them. Furthermore the tactics Mullah adopted were totally brutal. This made them double wrong. Pakistan army made a big mistake by supporting a minority group in Bangladesh.
Pakistan champion right for independence for Palestine and Kashmir. We debate on grounds that majority population want separate states in both Palestine and Kashmir, and therefore a fair poll should let them decide for there fate. The same rule should have been applied to Bangladesh also. In other words, it is right of the majority population to decide what they see fit for themselves.
Khalifah,
No need to toss books. But have patience to listen to other side of argument. My cousin’s father (a very loyal Bangladeshi) has lived 71, so you should not completely disregard their understandings. You will appreciate that not every fact is documented in books. Keep yourself open to new information my friend. Try to meet more Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. There is great wealth of information out there. & please don't stereo type us we Pakistanis comes in all shape, colors and sizes;)
Plant a tree