Of Shahzeb’s Killers Getting Pardoned


As the nation is embroiled in a debate on whether or not the pardoning was a right choice, the most ignored fact is that victim’s family may not have any choice. Either they did it because they were too much on the spiritual side, or they did it to keep their existence intact in the society dominated by the feudal and influential. As the news suggests, it is the latter.

And the Judge may have followed the Islamic principle of “Qisas” while adjudicating the case, that has upset the “liberal” lot for it relates to Islam. So, again the ignored fact is that the same principle of Qisas — regardless of right or wrong, as it remains a debate in modern times — has served as a blessing in disguise for the aggrieved family. Had they not pardoned Jatois and Talpurs, they would most certainly have been haunted throughout their lives by the feudal and influential families of the murderers. With that, would the “liberal” lot — I am addressing them primarily because I am sick of being learning that Islam has to be invited in ever social phenomenon — have successfully saved the family of Shahzeb from the wrath of Talpurs and Jatois? Simple answer is: No!

This is perhaps the best we could have as a verdict today. It truly reflects the culture and norms of our society; it is compatible with it eventually. Break the dominant feudal power in the society and then abolishing the concept of Qisas from the justice system might actually work in favor of poor as well for there would be no agent of fear left to be worried about for the aggrieved and not-so-influential victim(s).

Advertisements

Story Of Human Rights


Human Rights

Human Rights


And once in Ancient time it was decided that people should have rights too other than Kings and Emperors — which was great; Except not everyone agreed. And it only took a few thousand years of fighting and declarations and more fighting until everyone finally agreed that Human Rights should apply to everyone. And they all lived happily ever after … Except for one little problem: If people have freedom to speak their mind, then why are they suppressed? If people have right to food and shelter, then why 16,000 people are dying of starvation every day — one every five seconds? If people have freedom of speech, why are thousands in prisons for speaking their mind? If people have the right to education, why over a billion at all are unable to read? If slavery has truly been abolished, why are 27 million people still enslave today? Why unjust is prevailing and innocents are held in prisons and tortured and wars are happening?


On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Do you think everyone really lived happily ever after that? Do you think every state in the world respect the charter of Human Rights passed by UN? There are 30 articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights charter and each article is followed by the strict Human Rights but essence of the matter is that none of the article is in full functioning — none of the article is honored under Human Rights; none of the state in the world abide by the law.


For instance, the article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


Article 16 states that marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.


Article 18, which I believe is quite controversial with respect to the uncalled for religious controversies, states that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.


So what it’s that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are documented and why it’s documented? Because the Godfathers of Democracy and Justice and the custodian of God-knows-what religion are clothed with authority and omnipotence and under that breaching these sets of rules which are determined to be followed by the world — the primary legislation is dismantled all over the world. There’s an old idiom: When old cock crows, the young cock learns. In the hour of need when Godfathers of Democracy and Justice need to show some mercy on the Human Rights charter, they’re more busy in proving themselves superior akin to Napoleon and Hitler or perhaps God in regards with the attitude of superiority.


The fact is, when the Universal Declaration was signed, it didn’t have the ‘force of law’. It was just signed then — the force of law was merely optional. And despite many more documents, conventions, treaties and laws — the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is still a little more than worth on a piece of page.


PS: Inspired from a brief documentary entitled “Story Of Human Rights”.

NRO Thrashed


17 Members Bench Of Supreme Court

17 Members Bench Of Supreme Court


Since the promulgation of NRO to date, it has always been confronted by absolute majority of Pakistanis. Now it’s adjudicated by 17 members bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan, after 5 hours of long discussion in a meeting room, to ultimately drub the NRO. A host of argle-bargles had kept on brewing in at times to prove and disprove if NRO was really an ordinance to subscribe to.


The controversy has now come to an end. A long standing issue is finally settled with a strongly yearned for decision.


Today again, I’ve started believing that the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ — that has always been a part of Judiciary in the past — is now buried deep under the ground. This is the same de facto ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ that has ruined Pakistan all the time in the past. This decision of Supreme Court is lauded by everyone by and large. Some exceptions — when ‘Jiyalas’ are concerned at this particular event — are always there.


The recent decision has opened new horizons of Justice, and that how Supreme Court will adjudicate so many cases against the so many beneficiaries of NRO. Supreme Court should adjudicate the long standing cases imminently. But there are problems with the initial velocity of the proceedings at this beginning stage against the culprits since the hierarchy begins with the name of incumbent president of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari who’s said to be the top banana amongst the NRO beneficiaries.


The Article 248 of the constitution of Pakistan gives legal immunity to the president of Pakistan. But there’s something startling in the same constitution under the article 25 of the constitution which guarantees that every citizen is equal before the law and is entitled to the equal protection of law. The startling thing is now about to begin that no ‘reference’ has been made in the article 25 of the constitution that can disjoin or conjoin article 25 with the article 248 and vice versa. So, if anything, it has in some manner become an oxymoron. However, at different places, there are quite a number of references mentioned in the constitution just in case that it wouldn’t become double-barreled.


Whatever the case see may, but the question is simple: why a president can’t be summoned before the court?


Once, Hazrat Omar RA appeared before the court of Medina. Somebody had made a complaint against him. The judge stood up to show respect to the Caliph as he entered the court. “This is the first injustice you have done to the plaintiff,” said Omar RA, addressing the judge.


Modern democratic states have yet to reach this level of democracy. Their heads cannot be summoned before an ordinary court.


Not long since the article 248 of the constitution has been challenged in Supreme Court — the petition of which was filed by Communist Party of Pakistan — which says that the article 41 of Chinese constitution gives courts the right to summon any leader including the president of China before the court. A socialist country can summon its president, democratic countries can’t. Gee whiz!


In a wake of this donnybrook, we should be thinking that why such looters and plunderers like Zardari hasn’t been punished ever in the past. Perhaps or rather we don’t have any quick response to this question — only when the de facto ‘greatest national interest’ is concerned — yet we’ve so many responses suddenly lining up one after other once the de facto explanandum is snubbed from the mainstream politics of Pakistan. One big response would be the uncontrolled state of accountability which, to all appearances, is now attempting to get back on the track.


The journey to provide justice to Pakistan — by Supreme Court judges restored after 2 years of interminable efforts and exertion of awaam — hasn’t finished after the annulment of NRO. The rejoicing is effective at the moment, but subject to change depending upon the performance of Judiciary in future, as I’ve an urge to remind this again and once again. Supreme Court must again prove its commitment to the Justice by rendering the Justice — again, in a manner which gives evidence about Justice. Justice is all we need.

This is for the genuine beneficiaries of NRO: for how long could you save yourself now? Your time’s up.

The Godfather Of Democracy & Justice


Detainee Abuse

Detainee Abuse


In any country, the lion’s share of independency is always withheld by the respective government even though the country is said to be a modern democratic country. When we witness such an unjust specially on the name of ‘greatest national interest’, it means we’re deprived of our rights. This time it’s not directly the Pakistan or Pakistanis deprived of their rights. On this opportunity related to the Justice Department of US, the de facto greatest national interest is about the detainee abuse that the photos of detainee abuse wouldn’t be released in as much as, and as said by President Barack Obama, it could whip up anti-American sentiment overseas and endanger US troops abroad, mostly in Afghanistan and Iraq. It should be noted that absolute majority of the detainees are foreigners and not the US citizens.


In a wake of organized demands by American Civil Liberties Union from the US Justice Department, the Federal Law has recently been modified in the mid of November 2009 on the name of greatest national interest. The new Federal Law, as stated by the High Court of US, says that the detainee abuse pictures would be withheld by the US Government.


The country that is said to have been a high-mettled supporter of democracy and justice and thus preaching the rest of the world to promote democracy and justice has itself been convoluted in the breaching of its own set of rules and collection of laws. This is what we call an apex hypocrisy that is blotted out on the name of de facto greatest national interest.


As the President Barack Obama said that the pictures of detainee abuse would give a rise to anti-American sentiment overseas, I ask: even withholding the pics, does the government of US could help itself subduing the voice of all those who raise their voice against the atrocities of US for a de jure reason? From another point of view, a host of Pakistanis — supporter of enlightened modernization — presume that having anti-American views makes one a Jamat-e-Islami activist, a fundamentalist or an extremist. But the Ghairat Brigade of Pakistan, sometimes or rather often snub the fact that 52% of Americans, contemporarily, want all their troops back home — the troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Ghairat Brigade of Pakistan wouldn’t call American Civil Liberties Union as extremist, fundamentalist or Jamat-e-Islami propagandist. But endorsing the cause of American Civil Liberties Union i.e. raising voice against the atrocities of American Government would make a Pakistani one of these three: Jamat-e-Islami activist, a fundamentalist or an extremist. This is how we’re — the Illah MashaAllah Ghairat Brigade of Pakistan.


So far, the American Civil Liberties Union has said that it’ll continue fighting for the photos’ release. I’m supporting the cause of ACLU and raising the voice against the heinous crimes the Government of America commits. You may call me a Jamat-e-Islami propagandist, a fundamentalist or an extremist. I really don’t care.

Haunted NRO


NRO & Supreme Court

NRO & Supreme Court


Body Politics of Pakistan needs no definition for diligently alert and watchful people of Pakistan. The others who are affiliated to respective political parties are quite cantankerous to accept any kind of blame on their political parties. And when the question arises that who looted and still looting the nation — interestingly and engrossingly everyone becomes so innocent that they start calling Rooti as Choochi. Not so good, but still worthy enough of causing shame. National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) is one such thing that has again made our leaders substantiate with evidence that either they really are infants that they call Rooti as Choochi or awaam is still in a state of infancy. Possibility of both could also be the case, by chance that it’s Pakistan.


Since the time the list of NRO beneficiaries has been made available to the general public on the directives of Prime Minister Gilani, every political party is asserting that they’re falsely accused of being the beneficiary of NRO. Some 8,041 people have benefited from NRO, out of which 34 are well known and threadbare politicians.


NRO was promulgated on the name of greatest national interest of Pakistan, but is that a way to acquit the criminals of nation without means of a decision making echelon, or without proper justice; is that the way to let go the looters of nation and maintain the status quo each time by giving immunity to the looters of nation? How can this nation progress when the nation itself is bestowing amnesty to the looters. What more disgrace it could ever be that a robber is robbing our home and we’ve set ourselves free to watch the robber and allow him to rob as much as his ability allows him. We’re too generous without principles, no?


An American friend of mine was saying: I actually wanted to write a movie about missing person from Pakistan — and show the world how messed up this whole Bush-created War on Terror has become. My husband is a screenwriter. But he told me that “nobody in Hollywood wants to make movies about the war on terror.” And I am afraid he is right. Americans just want to keep on shopping and living their lives like nothing is wrong. But, Absar, everything is wrong!


After reading her, I gave her words a second thought. Are we not doing the same thing, I ask? We’re living our lives as if nothing is wrong. Yet everything is wrong. We’re still living our lives in a phenomenal disorientation — and the macho-paranoia of saving the grace of our affiliated political parties while always treating them as superior than others. Consequentially, the looters of Pakistan are safe on account of our choice.


The Ghairat Brigade — the people of Pakistan — and the incriminated politicians are, for the most part, still reluctant to accept that they’ve never been a part of corruption; they’ve never sought illegitimate personal gain through actions such as bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft, and embezzlement. . If none of the politician robbed the nation — and I say again, if those politicians aren’t the troublemakers — then who did? A poltergeist very likely, no? If everyone is guiltless, then we can always be skeptical about a poltergeist. People missed this fact. This could be the case when Pakistan is concerned since the blame game is a favorite political game of Pakistani politicians, political activist, and the Ghairat Brigade i.e. awaam.


National Reconciliation Ordinance bestowed the would-never-come-again opportunity to our leaders; it bestowed them a license to loot once again. The flippancy of awaam should come to an end, besides. When will the Pakistanis get relieve from the corrupt apparatus? There’s a way out of this, I can see: That’s “Justice” — our Supreme Court. The ball is in the court of our judiciary and only judiciary can adjudicate the fate of the looters of the nation. We’ve strived hard for the freedom of judiciary for this day — to see the justice. Justice is all we want, we want to see a new system in Pakistan while penalizing by law the looters of nation. Chief Justice of Pakistan Mr. Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, are you listening?