PTI Tsunami in Karachi and MQM

I need to start with so-called controversy. Why Imran Khan is not opposing MQM ? Imran Khan said many times in his interview that ‘we should know our real enemy and MQM is not our major enemy’. MQM currently holds only 25 seats out of 342 in the National Assembly of Pakistan, Which means that in National assembly MQM only has 7.30 % majority compared to PPP, which has 93 seats i.e. 27.2 % in National Assembly. Also, take into account PML- N which has 68 seats in National Assembly.

In addition, MQM political control is only limited to Karachi and Hyderabad. Whereas, compared to PPP and PML-N, together they have political control in all 4 provinces including Azad Kashmir. Therefore, why should Imran Khan and its party PTI focus on MQM? I personally think Imran Khan and his party adopt a very strategic policy and this shows their political matureness and sensibility.

I would like to quote “Sun Tzu” who was a Chinese General, who stated ‘It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one…”

PTI which is already attacking PPP and PML-N (the two main Mafia parties) it’s not a clever move to attack third party (MQM) .No party in the history of Pakistani Politics so much vibrantly attacked (politically) the vote bank of PPP and PML-N together, however, now time has changed for good. PTI and its leadership are getting closer to their benchmark and objective day by day. The more time PTI gets, the more political supports they’ll able to gain, as it is prime facie obvious.

Now I’ll come to the Karachi Jalsa and what I feel and experienced when I was there. Firstly, people from all work of life participated there. Majority were youngster and middle age men. I had hardly able to saw few old people. The ground was not grassy as one in Lahore; there was a lot of dust and dirt but it doesn’t really matter as no one cares about those fiddling things. Secondly, around 80% of the people at the Jalsa Gah unable to get a seat/chair, me myself stood for 5 hours as chairs were not enough for such a massive crowd ,also people who were in front rows it’s difficult to take a breath even . Thirdly, there was no feeling of terror among people in Jalsa Gah, all men and women were full of passion and energy. This was the first time when huge number of Pathan and Urdu speaking community was together and shouting slogans in favor of Pakistan and their leadership especially Imran Khan. Such as:-

‘ Aik Tsunami.. Aik Tofaan.. Imran Khan Imran Khan.. Aik Tsunami.. Aik Tofaan.. Imran Khan Imran Khan..”

As usual theme of PTI, Pop songs were played and one thing which impressed me personally, that songs were played in different languages including Urdu and Pashto. Which gave a very important positive message to all Karachiites and Pakistan, that all communities could be unite as they were before 1985.

PTI gave huge respect to senior political figure Javed Hashmi. When he entered the Jalsa Gah, all of the crowd gone crazy unexpectedly and starts shouting slogans in favor of him.

‘ Aik Bahadur Admii.. Hashmi Hashmi ”

I must say after Imran Khan Javed Hashmi won the hearts of the people at Jalsa Gah. Ironically people were discussing among themselves about Javed Hashmi’s struggle against dictatorship and towards democratic process.

Imran Khan, in his usual style addressed the massive Karachiites as because of IK people attended the Jalsa on 25 Dec 2011. He is man behind all success. I don’t want to comment on his speech as he is one of the finest public speaker and know what he says. Imran Khan Speech of Karachi Jalsa was far much better as he did not criticize any political parties, apart from one joke related to cricket match with Nawaz Sharif. He focused on his political agenda and vision. Imran Khan promised the people that he will try his level best to achieve Quaid’s dream of welfare state when he’ll come in power. At this point in time, it’s too early whether PTI able to won huge number National assembly seats from Karachi or not, but there is no doubt, now PTI is a force in Karachi even. Notwithstanding, MQM is political reality and its supporters are of different mindset compared to PPP and PML-N.

Some drawingroom people said Khan did not clearly mentioned his policies. I just need to tell them one thing It was Jalsa not PowerPoint presentation where intellectual or think-tank were sitting. PTI Jalsa Karachi gave positive message to all Pakistan especially Karachiites that politics in Karachi is moving towards peace and harmony rather than division and ethnicity.

Rise of Khan


Many of our elders have either lived through or grew up listening to stories of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his electrifying rallies and speeches as he spearheaded the first grassroots political movement in the country’s history. Imran Khan’s started revolutionary politics, if one goes by what he said/done in Lahore on October 30, as he wanted a change in the prevailing status quo. And while some people in the blogosphere and on Twitter/Facebook were already wondering whether another Bhutto has been born, no one can deny that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader has quite substantially shaken the country’s political landscape with his massive rally in Lahore. A 2 week later, the hoopla over his rally in Lahore, which had over a around 250,000 people in attendance, has not died down.




At that point I would like to add you can’t compare Imran Khan Struggle with any political figure since 1947. As far as Zulfiqar A Bhutto is concerned he was an old political player in politics, as his family was in politics since ages. Also, before Zulfiqar A Bhutto started his own solo flight he was in 60’s backed by General Ayub Khan as he was foreign minister in his cabinet. Nawaz Sharif is also no exception at all; he was backed by General Zia ul Haq in his initial political career. However, the big question is whether Imran Khan is backed by establishment or in crud terms Army? The answer is NO ! How can a person spend more than 15 years in opposition with no favors? In addition, I have certain other reasons for that, firstly establishment can’t make you a popular leader. Indeed due to the efforts of an establishment a person could become a minter or even prime minter but can’t become a popular leader (as quoted by a very senior journalist Hassan Nisar). Imran Khan who was offered Prime minister ship in 1988 and in 2002, rejected the offers, why should he now chooses the shortcut? Any rational person could not accept these presumptions. Indeed, there are chances that now establishment is baking but who cares!

Imran Khan and his party vision able to attract those who are normally not associated with the political process, those who have become disaffected with the mainstream parties and are tiring of what they see as elected governments whose leaders enrich only themselves and provide no semblance of good governance.



Khan’s appeal is not surprising. He is best known as the captain who brought back the Cricket World Cup to Pakistan in 1992. Pakistanis also appreciate his philanthropic instincts as in 1994, he founded the Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Center, which offers free care for cancer patients. As such, Khan is a departure from leaders who hail from political dynasties, such as the Bhuttos or the Sharifs, and boast immense rural landholding.


Whatever disagreements one may have with Imran Khan’s ideology or views, one can no longer dismiss Khan and his party as something of an irritant on the national political scene. From now on till the next election is held, he will have to be taken seriously and his party’s electoral fortunes will most probably be far better than they have been in the past — the best being when Mr Khan himself won a seat to the National Assembly from Mianwali in the 2002 elections. If any party thinks that he is safe in his glass palace then time will tell, as Imran Khan will definitely hit everyone’s vote bank including PML-N, PML-Q, PPP and ANP.

Khan stance on the Taliban’s and military operations is very clear since 2004, although not rising to the level of outright support(from liberals), is nonetheless very dangerous in some people. He pledged never to use the army to carry out military operations against its own peple, and that tribal elders would be able to eliminate the scourge of terrorism if the problem is left to them to deal with. In my personal view, his stand is absolutely correct, rational and genuine, as military operation is not the key to success. One can view what is happening in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Palestine. Military is not the solution, the only solution is dialog and to win the heart and minds of the people.

Zero Tax Returns of Our So Called Leaders


This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Retirement ? Retirement is not the answer



Sahibzada Mohammad Shahid Khan Afridi’s announcing his retirement may not have come as a surprise, but it is, nevertheless, disappointing. Alas, what was feared happened. Yet another talented cricketer bites the dust, as far as his playing career is concerned anyway. Nicknamed ‘Boom Boom’ by his fans, Afridi’s success story was nothing short of a fairytale. He knew how to pull crowds to stadiums. Spectators would leave after he would be given out, for he was their hero, the one they came to expect fireworks from. And with his aggressive batting style he rarely disappointed anyone even if he was given out after facing two balls because even those two balls would be converted into boundaries.

He made his ODI debut on 2 October 1996 against Kenya.Discovered at the age of 16 in 1996 when he hit the fastest century, a 37-ball 100, in an ODI against Sri Lanka. Afridi later became better known as a valuable all-rounder and then recognised as one of the best leg spinners. Not only does he hold a record for hitting the highest number of sixes in the history of the 50-over format, he is also the leading Twenty20 wicket taker.

Giving match winning performances, especially in the World Twenty20 Championship in 2009, which Pakistan won, Afridi became the obvious choice for captaincy after Younis Khan’s retirement from the format. Later, he was also appointed the ODI captain for the 2010 Asia Cup. The 2011 World Cup saw him leading the Pakistan side from the front when he took the team to the semi-finals, something which he had promised to do. Taking 21 wickets, he also became one of the top bowlers of the event. Pakistan’s next outing after the World Cup saw us winning the ODI series against the West Indies but the triumphant captain on his return from the Caribbean got himself into trouble when he complained and criticized to the media about interference regarding team selection from an unnamed source (which was obvious).

In doing so perhaps Afridi was hoping that the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) Chairman Ijaz Butt would call him over to inquire what was bothering him. Instead the careless talk earned him a show cause notice from the PCB. Then, on May 19, he was also removed from captaincy of the ODI squad when Test team captain Misbah replaced him for the two-match Ireland series. Already disturbed by his father’s illness, the dynamic player known to follow his heart finally decided to quit. He is 31 and at the peak of his career. This is certainly not the time for him to go.

One thing which irritates me is whenever; there are some positive performances by any sportsman, our so-called board always one way or the other shows unenthusiastic attitude towards players. This is not restricted to Cricket. Sports like squash, snooker, and even in hockey, governing bodies always according to their history interrupt the ongoing game. Frankly, there could be only two reasons for the one could be ‘Boards did not like their players success’ or ‘they like their players success too much’. On the other hand, we must know that in Pakistan whenever players are given too much power they dominate their boards!


On the contrary, we have a very angry PCB chairman who believes in punishing every little slip up even though he himself may have caused blunders. There is no room for forgiveness in his books. This uncompromising and inflexible attitude has hurt others like Mohammad Yousuf and Younis Khan too, so no one really blames Afridi who has refused to play under the current PCB setup.

Soon after he called it quits on May 30, Afridi was backed by Federal Sports Minister Shaukatullah Khan who said that the player was left with no other choice and that he will do all that he can to have the situation reversed. Both the Senate and National Assembly’s Standing Committees on Sports are also on Afridi’s side. They have also asked PCB’s Patron-in-Chief President Asif Ali Zardari to intervene and reorganise the board that includes the removal of its Chairman Ijaz Butt.

Afridi, who withdrew from the Ireland matches due to his father’s illness in the United States, said he was roughly treated by the PCB. Some of the Statements are as follows:-

“I play for my country and for my people,” he said. “I led the team to the semi-final of the World Cup but the reward was such that I was not sure about my captaincy.” Afridi said his decision to retire was final, as he would not play under the current PCB, headed by Chairman Ijaz Butt, but hinted at a comeback if there was a change in leadership.

“This current board treats players roughly and I will not play under this set-up. But if this set-up is changed only then will I consider coming back because I have always played for my people and will play for them.” Afridi said he had battled against the game’s match-fixing menace and had put a disjointed Pakistan team back together.

Afridi finished as player of the tournament in the first two editions of the World Twenty20, in 2007 and 2009, helping Pakistan to the title in the latter tournament in England.

“I served the country to the best of my ability but did not deserve this treatment. I wanted to leave cricket on a happy note, but that did not come about,” Afridi said.


However, I would have expected Afridi to put all the politics aside and emerge as the bigger person under the horrible state of affairs. I thought there was a true leader in him just as there was in Imran Khan. I hoped that he would continue to storm the nation with his feats after being mentored by Wasim just as Wasim had done when Imran guided him. I imagined Afridi to retire like Shoaib Akhtar, with tears of love for the game in his eyes, and not the detestation that he portrayed. I urge Afridi to reconsider his statements, put his ego or self esteem aside and serve the team regardless of his inconsistency with PCB. This is too sour a note for a talent like him to withdraw.

Mohammad Ali Jinnah as a Lawyer


Guys I would like to share very fascinating  aspects regarding Jinnah’s professional legal career, the following abstract were mostly written & collected originally by ‘Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada’ , a well known senior constitutional lawyer of Pakistan . I have put these collections and abstracts on this blog so that everyone can read it.

Edgar Snow, the well known American author, noted that even if
one only appraised Jinnah as a barrister, it would be to acknowledge that
he had won the most monumental judgment in the history of the bar. He
had recognized in the romantic ideal of Pakistan, a case that could be
fought and won. Lord Denning, the Master of Rolls, in fact, Master of
Rulings, had recalled with pleasure the fact that the Quaid-i-Azam, the
Founder of Pakistan, had been a member of Lincoln’s Inn. President Bill
Clinton during his visit to Pakistan in the year 2000 at the lunch given in
his honour by the Chief Executive remarked that Mr. Jinnah was the
greatest constitutional lawyer of the Common Wealth. Jinnah’s
outstanding career as a Counsel is beyond any cavil or controversy
whatsoever. In a Broadcast from B.B.C., Sir Stafford Cripps spoke of
him as “a most accomplished lawyer outstanding amongst Indian lawyers
and a fine constitutionalist.” Last but not least, one might recall the
opinion of Mahatma Gandhi, who, in his letter to Lord Birkenhead,
described Mr. Jinnah and Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru as the two cleverest
lawyers of India.

In about 1892, the General Manager of Graham Trading Co.,
Karachi, an Englishman, who was a great friend of Jinahbhai Poonja,
offered to admit his son, Mohammad Ali, in the Head Office of the
Company in London, as an apprentice for three years, where he could
learn practical business administration to enable him to join his father’s
firm on return from London. Around January, 1893, Jinnah sailed for
England. It seems that within three months of apprenticeship of the
British Business Company, Jinnah decided to study law. Jinnah himself
recalled that as a young boy, when he saw for the first time a barrister
robed in gown, wig collars and bands, he desired to be a barrister. Jinnah
passed the usual preliminary examination to enable him to start his study
of law and then joined Lincoln’s Inn.While addressing the Karachi Bar Association on the occasion of the birth of Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) on January 25,
1948, Jinnah disclosed the reason for joining Lincoln’s Inn, because
there, in the main Hall, in the huge fresco, the Holy Prophet (PBUH) was
included among the Law Givers of the world.

Mr. Jinnah was enrolled on 24th August 1896 as an Advocate (O.S.)
of the Bombay High Court. Through the kind offices of an old friend, he
was admitted to the Chambers of John M. Macpherson, the Acting
Advocate-General of Bombay. Besides being an erudite lawyer,
Macpherson was a great gentleman, with an extremely fine presence and
soothing voice. He was very kind to Jinnah. Jinnah was also for
sometime in the Chambers of Sir George Lowndes, who afterwards
became the Law Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council, and later a
member of the Privy Council. Lowndes had a very clear and lucid mind,
and an extremely forceful and impressive manner of advocacy.
Macpherson and Lowndes left lasting impact on Jinnah’s personality. In
1900, came the first opportunity, when Mr. P.H. Dastoor, the Presidency
Magistrate of Bombay, left his post on leave. To secure some financial
support and to gain experience, Mr. Jinnah decided to apply for the
temporary vacancy. Through the efforts of Macpherson, the Advocate-
General, Mr. Jinnah was appointed as the Presidency Magistrate in May,
1900. From the cases dealt with and decided by Mr.Jinnah, it is apparent
that he was an able, judicious and balanced magistrate, with a special
care for legal detail. Mr. Jinnah officiated as Presidency Magistrate for a
total of six months. On the expiry of this period, Sir Charles offered him
a permanent appointment on a salary of Rs. 1,500 per month. Mr. Jinnah
politely declined the offer, wryly adding that his ambition was to earn Rs.
1,500 a day. Eventually, Mr. Jinnah succeeded in earning Rs.1500/- a
day which was a huge amount in those days.

Sensational cases apart, Mr. Jinnah had built up a solid, substantial
and lucrative practice within a few years after his return to Bombay. He
was the most versatile of advocates, practicing with equal success before
civil and criminal courts, original and appellate sides of the High Courts,
and last but not the least, before the highest tribunal of the
Commonwealth, the Privy Council. Mr. Jinnah was a triple combination,
Carson’s ‘cross-examination’, Marshall Hall’s ‘Marshalling of facts’ and
Simon’s ‘subtlety of law’.


The Caucus Case
In 1907 the general elections to the Bombay Municipal Corporation
were to take place. At that time, one of the constituencies was that of the
Justices of Peace for the town and island of Bombay. They had to return
16 members. Sir Pherozeshah Mehta was consistently returned for many
years by that constituency. Pherozeshah had by his services both inside
and outside the Corporation acquired a commanding position in the
deliberations of the Corporation. Some European members as well as the
then Municipal Commissioner, Mr Sheppard, formed a clique which was
in those days called the ‘caucus’ to defeat Pherozeshah at the polls.
Harrison, the Accountant-General, Gell, the Police Commissioner and
Lovat Fraser, the then Editor of The Times of India took a leading and
active part in the campaign.

The poll was taken in the Municipal Hall on February 21, 1907 at a
meeting of the Justices when the Municipal Commissioner, Sheppard
presided. The result was declared the next day and 16 ‘caucus’ ticket
candidates succeeded and Pherozeshah Mehta stood seventeenth. Public
indignation on the declaration of the result was very great. The l6 person
who got in, was Suleman Abdul Waheed of Ladha Ibrahim & Co., who
had contracts with the Municipal Act, disqualified from being a
councillor. A petition was presented to the Chief Election Judge to
declare that he was disqualified from being a Councillor and that Sir
Pherozeshah Mehta, who stood 17 got automatically elected to the
Corporation. Mr. Jinnah represented Sir Pherozeshah Mehta.
Mr. Jinnah’s cross-examination of witnesses specially of Lovat
Fraser, Editor of Times was devastating. Mr. Jinnah urged that:-
Mr. Haji Noormahomed gave his vote to Sir Pherozeshah on the first
occasion, and exhausted his right of voting. On the second occasion when
he voted for all the 16 candidates he acted contrary to law. A second illegal
act could not destroy the legality of the first. The Counsel cited the case of
Queen vs. Avery in support of his argument. Mr. Jinnah’s contentions were
accepted by the learned judge and Sir Pherozeshah was declared as duly
elected to the Corporation. By getting the verdict in favour of Sir
Pherozeshah Mehta, Mr. Jinnah was recognized as one of the leading
lawyers.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak’s Case
When Bal Gangadhar Tilak, prominent Indian National leader, was
convicted for sedition, Mr. Jinnah appeared in the Appeal before the
Division Bench of Bombay High Court and drew a distinction between
disaffection and disapprobation. The sentence was set aside. Mr. Jinnah’s
legal acumen was acknowledged all over India. An attractive and
illustrated book THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT 1878-2003 was published
by the august Court through its heritage Committee consisting of eminent
judges and leading lawyers in its introduction — Hall of Justice — it is
stated: “In 1914, Tilak was prosecuted again on charges of sedition. This
time, his legal counsel was Mohammad Ali Jinnah, a renowned lawyer of
the Bombay Bar and a leader in the Indian National Congress. Jinnah
was convinced that Tilak had been prosecuted for his strong views about
Home Rule and independence for India and defended him so adroitly that
Tilak was acquitted by the High Court.”

Some Leading Cases
In the suit of Haji Bibi concerning the Aga Khan, which is
considered the longest suit in Bombay’s legal history, Mr. Jinnah
represented Shamsuddin, one of the contesting defendants. The
magnitude of the case may be gathered from the fact that voluminous
evidence on commission was taken at various places all over the world,
and as many as 128 issues were raised therein.
In the well-known defamation case of B.G. Horniman, Jinnah’s
masterly handling led to the conviction of the editor, printer and
publisher of the paper, Briton. Where Oscar Wilde had failed in a
somewhat similar case, Horniman succeeded due to Jinnah’s skill.
In the Bowla Murder case, which arose out of the infatuation of the
Maharajah of Indore for Mumtaz, the then Beauty Queen of India, and in
which, at one stage, the well- known British criminal lawyer, Marshall
Hall, was being brought in, Mr. Jinnah appeared for the main accused,
and at least saved him from the gallows.

In the Jitekar Trust Suit, Mr. Jinnah dealt with the doctrines of
Hanafi and Shafae Law. In Ranchood Narain and Ajoba and a number of
other suits, Mr. Jinnah analysed certain aspects of Hindu Law, and its
different schools, in considerable detail.
In 1921, Mr. Jinnah appeared for the petitioners to obtain a
mandamus certiorari or other appropriate writ to quash various
resolutions of the Bombay Corporation. This being the first case of its
kind, the Court was reluctant to issue the writ.
In the case of the assassination of the author of Rangila Rasool, the
assailant, Ilam Din, had been sentenced to death. In the appeal, Jinnah,
representing him, pleaded that provocation coupled with the youth of the
accused were good grounds for not inflicting the death penalty. The
British Judges, however, did not allow any weight to these submissions;
and the young man was executed. But since then Lahore has rarely seen
such a procession of mourners as accompanied his funeral.

In Salim Khatoon versus Arshadur Rehman, Mr. Jinnah faced Sir
Tej Bahadur Sapru before the Hyderabad High Court.
In the suit of the Raja of Nanpara, Jinnah appeared for the plaintiff
and with his usual skill and ability, obtained a favourable decree that was
upheld by the Privy Council. Mr. Jinnah represented the Editor of the
Bombay Chronicle in a ease of contempt of court. He defended Pir
Pagaro in the trial court as well as in the appeal. In the Bhopal Waqf case,
Chowdhry Naimatullah, a distinguished counsel, advanced a scholarly
argument. But Jinnah’s legal objection prevailed.


Some Anecdotes
“Mr. Jinnah”, angrily shouted Justice Martin, “you are not
addressing a third class magistrate”. Rapier-like flashed the counterthrust:
“There isn’t a third class counsel before your Lordship.” Jinnah
and Setalvad were appearing for opposite parties before the Judge on the
original side in the High Court. At about five O’clock in the evening the
learned Judge suggested to the Counsel to continue their arguments, as
he was prepared to sit up to seven O’clock, in order to conclude the case.
Jinnah retorted that since the Court time was 5:00 p.m., thereafter
Lordship would be sitting alone, as he as well as Sir Setalvad had
previous professional engagements. Both Counsel then left punctually as
the hour struck.

In 1941, Jinnah appeared before the Sindh Chief Court for the
appellants in the case of Bishamberdas and Co. versus Sachoomal.
Thousands thronged to the Court to hear him or at least to see him. The
Court room was jampacked and the corridors were full when Chief
Justice Davis and Justice Weston entered. Seeing the huge crowd, Davis,
CJ, asked the Court Clerk to clear and close the doors of the Court-room.
Jinnah got up and smilingly said that the doors of justice must always
remain open. The Judges agreed to the suggestion provided the crowd
remained quiet. Mr. Jinnah said to those present to remain quiet. The
day’s proceedings were then concluded smoothly.

Some Opinion on his Performance
Frank Moraes, the distinguished journalist and famous author, saw
Mr. Jinnah in action in Court, He wrote: “Watch him in the court room as
he argues a case. Few Lawyers command a more attractive audience. No
man is more adroit in presenting his case. If to achieve the maximum
result with minimum effort is the hall-mark of artistry, Mr. Jinnah is an
artist in his craft. He likes to get down to the bare bones of a brief; in
stating the essentials of a case his manner is masterly’. The Court room
acquires an atmosphere as he speaks, junior’s crane their necks forward
to follow every movement of the tail, well-groomed figure; senior
counsels listen closely; the Judge is all attention. Mr. Jinnah’s voice has
small volume. Its tone is low, but within its limited rang it is surprisingly
elastic. One moment it purrs persuasively, an interruption and its rasps.”
Joachim Alva, late Editor of the Forum, observed: “One place will
long cherish Jinnah’s memory; there it remains imperishable. Courage
and sheer impudence have won him fame in the Law Courts. His
hypnotic influence spreads his fame all over. His terrific encounters with
the Judges and the bombshells he throws in the courts arc well- known.
As an Advocate, he possesses gifts which cast a spell on the Courts, the
Judges, the Juries, the Solicitors, and Clients, all alike. As a Counsel, he
has ever held his head erect, unruffled by the worst circumstances. He
has been our boldest Advocate, no Judge dare bully him. He will not
brook any insult. Jinnah’s ready tongue and brilliant advocacy have
worked off all judicial storms and won him all round admiration. Clients
and Solicitors prize Jinnah’s services for his matchless grit and courage
to stand up for the causes he represents. Certain Judges, notorious for
their calculated Suits to the junior practitioners, hold their tongue when
face to face with Jinnah. Jinnah has preserved his position at the Bar
intact and unsullied. Toadying or the remotest connection that excites
suspicion is foreign to his nature. In short, he is the embodiment of the
highest standards of the Bar. The compliment paid him that he is ‘the
Lord Simon of the Indian Bar’ does not awkwardly sit on him.”
On the occasion of the Centenary of the Bombay High Court, K.M.
Munshi, a prominent lawyer said: “M.A. Jinnah was another eminent
Indian Lawyer of this period. Tall and impeccably dressed, he stood in a
class by himself. His advocacy was characterized by strong
commonsense, great courage and forthright approach. A man of great
integrity, he would never stoop to trickery, though he could be
devastating if a Judge or an opponent was inclined to be offensive. Once
a firm of solicitors, on behalf of their clients, had asked him to put some
questions in the Legislative Assembly, of which he was a member, and
wanted to enlist his enthusiastic support by offering a sort of bribe in the
shape of a brief for opinion marked 100 guineas, a colossal figure for
such a brief in those days. He grew wild with rage and flung the brief out
of his chamber. Once while attending a Conference with Strangman, he
found the latter offensive. Immediately he walked out of the 9 and for
years, never spoke to Strangman, nor addressed him as ‘my learned
friend’.
Let me refer to the case of B. Das & Co. (Appellant) vs. Broach
Electric Supply and Development Corporation Ltd (Respondent). The
Appeal was against the judgment of the single judge of the High Court,
who was persuaded by Mr. Thamas Strangman to set-aside an award for
the reasons that the letter marked without prejudice was tendered to the
Arbitrator who read it but rejected it in evidence. The Solicitors engaged
Mr. Jinnah for appellants, who argued the appeal before Marten C.J. and
Crump, J. Mr. Strangman strongly defended the order but was over-ruled
by the Bench. The learned judges held: In our opinion this finding of the
learned judge cannot be sustained. Even if it was a case of a Judge in
Court, documents are often tendered to the Court on which the Court has
to decide whether they are admissible or inadmissible. If then one was to
hold that in every case in which a judge rejects as evidence any
document handed up to him, it follows that his mind must have been
prejudiced by what he read and that consequently his judgment cannot
stand, the result would be really absurd. The appeal must be allowed, and
the notice of motion dismissed with costs.”
In his book, Famous Judges, Lawyers and Cases of Bombay, P.B.
Vaehha writes. “Muhammad Ali Jinnah is in a sense the most celebrated
member of the Bombay Bar, for he is the only man who, after extensive
and eminent practice at the Bar for a number of years, ultimately passed
into general history. He was very clear headed and he drove home his
points both on law and facts with a lucid and persistent eloquence. He
appeared in a number of important suits and appeals on the civil side, as
well as in great criminal cases, including the famous Bawla Murder
Case.

Jinnah’s mastery in the forensic field is apparent from the fact that
one of his devils, M.C. Chagla, rose to be the Chief Justice of the High
Court of Bombay, the first Indian to hold that office. In an article in the
Bombay Law Journal, in 1927, Chagla observes: “Jinnah was a pure
artist in the manner and method of his presentation. Even the most
complex facts became simple and obvious when he waved his wand over
them. He could be ferociously aggressive and almost boyishly persuasive,
as and when the occasion arose, and what particularly helped in his
advocacy was the absolute clear head that he possessed and on which he
justly prided him had common sense, that most uncommon of qualities,
in an uncommon degree.”More, recently, Chagla, reaffirming this view
in his memoirs, wrote: “He had a very striking personality, and the
presentation of a case as he handled it was piece of art. He was a superb
advocate. He was also a first-rate cross-examiner. What impressed me
most was the lucidity of his thought and expression. There were no
obscure spots or ambiguities about what Jinnah had to tell the court. He
was straight and forthright and always left a strong impression whether
his case was intrinsically good or bad. I owe a great deal to him, because
I learned in his chambers not only the art of advocacy, but how to
maintain the highest traditions legal profession. Jinnah was absolutely
impeccable in his professional etiquette.”

Mr. M.H. Seervai, Advocate-General of Maharashtra and author of
Constitutional Law paid tribute to Mr. Jinnah in a centenary meeting in
1976 and recalled: “The cases conducted by Mr. Jinnah in a masterly and
effective way. For 44 years in the High Courts, he observed that Mr.
Jinnah was the one of the greatest lawyers whom our courts have
produced. Let me mention one other case in which a tribute to Jinnah’s
power of cross-examination came from one of the most eminent lawyers
of Palestine and one of the most distinguished lawyers whom I have met,
Mr. Jinnah was engaged in a case, which came from Aden relating to the
Estate of a man called Bunnin Mehssa. The Estate was worth ten crore
Rupees (quite a large sum in those days). Against Jinnah’s client
appeared as a witness a Palestine lawyer called Dr. Eliash, Well, you can
understand Mr. Jinnah’s difficult task when I tell you that against the top
expert in Palestine and a man of immense capacity Mr. Jinnah had the
assistance of a Jewish butcher who bad to tell him what the Hebrew text
meant. I happened to be sitting next to Dr. Eliash because my leader was
on that side, and he said to me “Mr. Jinnah has difficult task but I am
greatly impressed with his cross-examination”. To have obtained that
tribute from a man who seemed to be an unrivaled authority in Hebrew
law, was a tribute well worth having.”

Judges on Jinnah
Jinnah’s forensic ability also earned judicial approbation. His
exposition evoked admiration from judges and juries alike; and the
judgments of cases in which he appeared are replete with appreciation of
the skill and ability with which he conducted these cases. Professor Raza
of St. Xavier’s College, Bombay, who was empanelled on various juries,
portrayed him as the ‘magician with the monocle’. The professor recalled
a murder case, wherein dissecting the evidence tendered by the
prosecution, Mr. Jinnah at short intervals would pause and pose the
question, “Is this the man?’ When the jury retired, each one asked the
other, “Is this man?” All of them had no hesitation in answering that this
was not the man, and they returned a unanimous verdict of ‘Not Guilty’.
Even a hostile Judge had to compliment Jinnah when the Jury,
contrary to His Lordship’s directions, decided to acquit the accused in
the famous Allo Rape Case at Surat.
Justice Beamon, in Pestonji versus Billimoria, reaffirmed that hard
cases notoriously make bad law. In that suit, the legatee had claimed the
sum assigned to hint in the deceased’s Will. The defendant trustee
contended that it appeared from the Will that this was not an ordinary
bequest, but was intended to be no more than the satisfaction of the debt
owed by the testator. Sir Jamshed Kanga wanted to lead evidence in
support of this contention; but Jinnah objected on technical legal grounds.
After discussing various arguments raised by both Counsels, His
Lordship upheld the objection and observed:
When the case came on for trial, the first question raised was whether the
defendant was entitled to lay before the Court evidence of facts alleged to
have been in the testator’s mind, and, therefore, necessary to be known to
the Court before it could truly apply the language used by the testator in
the second clause of the Will. This was, of course, strenuously opposed by
Mr. Jinnah for the plaintiff who, like most Counsels of experience, is
always most insistent on a legal technicality and most ingenious, and I may
say persuasive, in proportion as he feels that if his ground fails him his
case is lost. Nevertheless, after giving the matter my most anxious
consideration during the whole of his argument, and the exhaustive and
able reply to it by Mr. Kanga, I am still unable to free myself from the
logical compulsion of the technicality upon which Mr. Jinnah has taken his
stand.
Justice Martin, in the case of Tata Industries Bank Ltd., acknowledged
thus: “I have had the advantage of a very useful argument from Mr. Jinnah,
in the course of which  believe he has drawn my attention to all the points
that can be said in favour of this client.
In the instructive case of Tricum Das Mills, the doctrine of Indoor
Management and complicated questions of Company Law were involved.
In his exhaustive judgment, Justice Davar stated that “in this case some
very interesting and important questions of law arise for consideration.”
Dealing with Jinnah’s submissions, the learned Judge commented that
“Mr. Jinnah has throughout the hearing expended much labour and
argued with great skill and conspicuous lucidity.” In the end, while
decreeing the suit in favour of Mr. Jinnah’s client, the learned Judge
could not refrain from observing that “The plaintiff must feel much
indebted to the exertions of Mr. Jinnah who conducted his case, for this
result of the suit.” The same learned Judge, in the case of the Advocate-
General versus Fardoonji, wherein issues involved related to the doctrine
of Cypress and the power of the Court to vary and alter the decree
already passed, noted that “Mr. Jinnah has argued the question of the
powers of the court with great care and much elaboration and cited
several authorities in support of his contentious.12
Justice Chandravarkar, in the case of Bibi Khaver Sultan, wherein
the validity of a gift under Mohammedan Law came up for consideration,
and His Highness the Aga Khan was examined as a witness, observed
that “Mr. Jinnah conducted the plaintiffs case with considerable skill and
ability.” The same learned Judge, in the suit of Raghirji Vizpal, a case of
pledge and lien, complimented Jinnah “for having conducted the case
with his usual ability”.
In the famous case of the Raja of Nanpara, at Lucknow, leading
lawyers of India appeared against Jinnah. The learned Judge of the Oudh
Chief Court, whose decision was upheld by their Lordships of the Privy
Council, observed: “I must also express my sense of great indebtedness
to Mr. Jinnah for his extremely able arguments, which were of great
assistance to me in the decision of several difficult points of both fact
and law involved in the case.”
Their Lordships of the Privy Council very sparingly complimented
any Counsel in their judgments and decisions. Lord Thankerton, in the
reported judgment of the Privy Council in Abdul Majid Khan versus
Saraswati Bai, made this special mention. “The arguments of the
appellant were dealt with filly and clearly by Mr. Jinnah.”
Patrick Spens, the last Chief Justice of undivided India, paid a
tribute to “the tallness of the man, the immaculate manner in which he
was turned out. Referring to Jinnah’s practice before the Privy Council,
Lord Spens said: “I think the Privy Council is the most critical. It is a
friendly court, but is tremendously critical, and no one who had first
class brains, a great power of advocacy, and above all great tact and
politeness, would have made in so short a time such a fine practice as Mr.
Jinnah did before the Privy Council.”15

All India Reporter
By way of summing up, one might recall the glowing tribute paid to
Jinnah by the premier Legal journal of India. The All India Reporter:
“Although Mr. Jinnah’s career as a political leader and as the
representative of the successful Muslim Movement for separation in
India overshadows all other aspects of his life, a legal journal like this
has to take note of the fact that he was a lawyer of outstanding eminence
and in his death our country has lost one of its greatest lawyers. As a
brilliant advocate, he had few rivals. He was also universally recognized
as a man of unimpeachable integrity, and honoured by friend and foe
alike for his incorruptibility. Mr. Jinnah’s name will live in history as the
greatest protagonist of the two nation theory in India and the creator of
Pakistan.”Mr. Justice Davar

From the beginning Mr. Jinnah was for Independence of Judiciary.
This is borne out by the following incident. After Justice Davar had
sentenced Tilak to six years rigorous imprisonment, the Government
conferred a knighthood upon Davar, and the Bar Association to the High
Court of Bombay wanted to give him a dinner. A circular went round
asking those who wanted to join the dinner to sign it. When the circular
came to Jinnah, he wrote a scathing note to the effect that the Bar should
be ashamed to want to give a dinner to a judge who had obtained a
knighthood by doing what the Government wanted, and by sending a
great patriot to jail with a savage sentence. It seems that Justice Davar
came to know about this, and sent for Jinnah in his chambers. He asked
Jinnah how he thought Davar had treated Jinnah in his Court. Jinnah
replied that he had always been very well treated. Davar asked Jinnah
next whether he had any grievance against him. Jinnah said he had none.
Davar then asked: “Why did you write a note like this against me?”
Jinnah replied that he wrote it because he thought it was the truth; and
however well Davar might have treated him, he could not suppress his
strong feeling about the manner in which he had tried Tilak’s case. All
this goes to demonstrate the great regard which Jinnah had for Talik, and
also the courage and the spirit of nationalism which Jinnah displayed as a
young man.

Glowering Tribute
Let me conclude by referring the tribute paid by Mr. Justice
Muhammad Munir, former Chief Justice of Pakistan on 23 March, 1976
in the Seminar at the University of Punjab, Lahore: “I have appeared
with or against or heard as a judge some of the greatest lawyers of
England and India-Lawyers like Mr. Pritt Q.C., Mr. Diplock Q.C. (now
the Tr. Hon’ble Lord Diplock P.C.), soft-spoken Bhulabhai Desai,
aggressive K.M. Munshi, another top lawyer of Bombay. Sir Tej
Bahadur Supru pronouncing Arabic Sighas in a Wakf case, Mr. Hasan
Imam, many bald and grey headed veterans of the Lahore Bar. But in my
long experience I have never noticed that masterly analysis, classification
and presentation of facts and the lucidity and subtlety of argument which
I heard in a few Bombay cases argued by Mr. Jinnah.”


Ingenious & fraudulent person of Pakistan, of the decade

There are many people in politics; establishments, military and business community who always try their level best to dominate in the field of corruption and dishonesty. Taqiq Aziz beaten all almost every other person in the decade as far as cleverness and fraudulence is concern. I am sure not many people know him as it is his one of the major tactics to succeed in the field of hypocrisy.

Tariq Aziz was a close-aide of Pakistani ex-President Pervez Musharraf, his advisor and the former secretary of the National Security Council. He resigned from the post of NSC secretariat when Musharraf resigned from presidency on 18 August 2008. A former income tax officer, he was a college buddy of Pervez Musharraf, since both of them went to FC College, Lahore. Because of his close proximity with the military coup-maker, General Musharraf appointed him as the political wheeler and dealer whose job was to “knock together a pro-military alliance.” He was aided by Major General Syed Ehtasham Zamir, the head of ISI’s political wing, in maneuvering/coercing a list of ‘loyal’ candidates, before and after 2002 general elections. The list of such politicians included former two-time chief minister Aftab Ahmad Sherpao, who fled Pakistan after the 1999 military takeover, but later was cleared of such crimes by anti-corruption agency NAB set up by the military regime, once Sherpao decided to support it. He was later made Minister of Water and Power and then the Interior Minister. Another such politician was Makhdoom Faisal Saleh Hayat, a former Pakistan Peoples Party steadfast, who had been charged with defaulting on the repayment of loans from state-owned banks and had spent months in prison. He was then inducted in the pro-establishment Pakistan Muslim League (Q) and served first as the Interior Minister and then as Environment Minister.

During Benazir Bhutto’s government, he served Asif Zardari as the secretary/ advisor of environment agency.

A low-profile civil servant, Tariq Aziz was earlier principal secretary to Musharraf, and continues to be closely associated with the ‘Chief’. Despite the power he wields, he continues to be his old unassuming self. He was the only one among the inner circle who advised Musharraf not to go for the ill-fated referendum – a fact the President was man enough to acknowledge publicly. In short, Tariq Aziz has earned his boss’s complete trust.1

The reclusiveness of Hamid Javed, chief of protocol to Musharraf, seems true. The burly general was smart to use power while keeping himself in the background. The only time he got clubbed with Tariq Aziz in a controversy was when both of them showed interest in the regularisation of Islamabad’s zone four. MNA Faisal Saleh Hayat confirms that he lost his job as Interior Minister because he refused to budge before Tariq Aziz’s pressure to oblige.2

Ex Vice Chief Gen Yusaf claims that backchannel diplomacy with India spearheaded by Musharraf’s confidante Tariq Aziz was undertaken without taking army brass into confidence. Retired Lt Gen Shaukat Aziz who served as Musharraf’s CGS has now revealed that the boss used to take decisions unilaterally.

The two principal envoys— for Pakistan, a college classmate of Musharraf ’s named Tariq Aziz, and, for India, a Russia specialist named Satinder Lambah—were developing what diplomats refer to as a “non-paper” on Kashmir, a text without names or signatures which can serve as a deniable but detailed basis for a deal.

Shahid Aziz said Pervez Musharraf took most of the sensitive decisions without informing his corps commanders.He admitted that Pervez Musharraf, his COS Hamid Javaid and Tariq Aziz forced him to close down the investigations against Benazir Bhutto and when he refused to implement the orders, he was asked to resign from the NAB chairmanship in July 2007.

hahid Aziz reminisced, one day presidential aide Tariq Aziz ‘called me to say that the President had decided to close cases against BB and has asked you to make this happen. I refused and said I would better resign than closing these cases’.

‘Tariq Aziz called me up again to say that we have discussed and decided that if you don’t close the cases, you can resign. I asked who these ‘we’ who have decided so are.

Tariq Aziz said, Tariq Aziz, Gen Hamid Javed and Gen Kiyani (the then ISI chief). He, however requested that instead of destabilising the government through resignation, you (Gen Aziz) should go on a two-month leave on medical grounds and then resign.

’I obliged and tendered resignation on May 4, 2007, to be effective from July 4, 2007.’4

Benazir Musharraf Deal

NSC Secretary Tariq Aziz reportedly was one of the main players in the deal between Benazir Bhutto and Musharraf. He is the one who basically provoke Musharraf in such a deal.

NRO

Gen Pervez Musharraf was opposed to introducing the National Reconciliation Ordinance, but was forced by Chaudhry Shujaat Husain and then National Security Council secretary Tariq Aziz to change his view. Humayun Gohar (son of the late Altaf Gohar) said Musharraf was assuring the then PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto a fair trial and cooperation in getting her bail. However, he said, he agreed to issue the NRO under pressure from the president of the then ruling PML-Q and the secretary of the National Security Council.

The two leaders, he said, wanted Ms Bhutto to return to Pakistan as, in their estimation, her comeback would affect Mian Nawaz Sharif’s vote bank. These people, he said, had just no idea that the situation would take a turn which it did subsequently. According to him, then president Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were happy over the cooperation between Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto as both were regarded as moderates. However, vice-president Dick Cheney was against the deal as he believed that the PPP leader would not honour her commitments. Replying to a question, he said, the US had stopped supporting Musharraf after the assassination of Ms Bhutto. However, it was the army’s own decision that Gen Musharraf should quit power.5

Few people know that as the housing minister, Gilani had done him a big favour by allotting him a luxurious house in the F-6 Sector after relaxing the rules. This big house is still in the possession of Tariq Aziz, who is now serving as the secretary National Security Council (NSC), after his retirement as a bureaucrat.6

Quite interestingly, like a traditional politician in the habit of doing favours to applicants, Gilani himself had forgotten what he had done for this once low-profile bureaucrat in those days. But, ironically, Gilani, who was in the habit of not refusing any requests from civil servants, was reminded of this favour none other than Tariq Aziz himself during one of his secret visits to his (Gilani) dungeon at the Adalia Jail.

TA used to visit him in his capacity as the most powerful messenger of President Musharraf to make him fall in line. One night, Tariq Aziz had quietly whispered in the ears of the unbreakable Gilani that this was he who had actually allotted him the big house in F-6. It is believed Tariq Aziz had mentioned this decade-old favour of Gilani only to get his confidence to accomplish his “mission” of buying his political loyalties. He was giving the impression to Gilani that he was the man who remembered even small favours done to him many years back.

To fully understand the importance of this favour, it is required to first apprehend what an official residence means to a civil servant in Islamabad. A bitter joke that makes rounds in Islamabad is that it is easy to get a job not a government house. The first effort of any bureaucrat in the capital is to get a large residential house allotted in his/her name by hook or crook.

When Gilani was given the charge of the housing minister, Tariq Aziz had also got some relevant “sifarish” to influence Gilani for the allotment of a house in the elite area of F-6. A generous Gilani obliged the request and ordered the allotment of the house in the name of the civil servant, having little idea that one day the same bureaucrat would quietly come to visit him in the jail at late night to force him to betray his political leader Benazir Bhutto and join the Musharraf camp.

Gilani was usually visited by many messengers of the Presidency and Tariq Aziz was one of those frequent visitors. They all were very polite during their regular meetings with him at the Adalia Jail. But, as Gilani had refused to toe their line, they decided to use the stick. Gilani was put under serious pressure. Even, a raid party was arranged to conduct a raid on his jail cell from where his computer, CDs of movies, and mobile phone facilities were snatched though Gilani had claimed that the court had allowed him to retain those facilities. As it was not enough to harass him, a news item was got splashed all over the newspapers of Islamabad, giving an impression that the former speaker was involved in some serious crimes in his cell. The then superintendent jail Babar was used to harass Gilani by these top people.

2010

Tariq Aziz, the former secretary of the National Security Council, who has kept a determined silence ever since Musharraf resigned, recently made a rare TV statement and said his former boss will not return to Pakistan. He did not say ‘soon or never’ but his statement meant not for many years at least, unless something changes radically.

Official Perks after Resignation

Tariq Aziz is anything but reclusive. He continues to relish official accommodation with all the perks that he enjoyed under Musharraf. He remains on the panel of Asif Zardari’s advisers, thanks for brokering the NRO, and has gladly passed on his whole gang of, among other assets, wheeler-dealers to the presidency.

There is no parallel to one person, Tariq Aziz, enjoying so much power in any government, dictatorships or otherwise. He flaunted arrogantly the extent of his power by which he could make or break ministers, party presidents, ministers, governors, bureaucrats, you name it. And he did make and break many on his whim. He made the Chaudhrys the supreme family of this country and then put them in the doldrums when he developed a liking for Hamayun Akhtar. This made the Chaudhry cry out about his being their one time manager. Stories of his pomp and shenanigans were known widely but no one dared to publish because there was a goon club to manage his media. He remains the President of Lahore Race Club where under him even the names of national heroes, the awardees of Nishan-i-Haider, were tarnished as trophies for what was more gambling than racing. Aziz is the Chairman of the Lahore Race Club.

Even, in 2010 (PPP government) Tariq Aziz is enjoying the luxuries and favors or it would be better to say much more luxuries and favors compared to Musharraf’s period. The only most vibrant reason behind it is that he was involved in NRO and deal with Benazir Bhutto. Apparently, the current government was born through NRO.

References: The News, Geo, Wiki

Letter to Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad C. from Advocate Naeem Bokhari

I would like to share a very interesting letter , written by Supreme Court Advocate Naeem Bohkari addressed to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.His open letter against Chief Justice Iftikhar M. Chaudhry published on Feb 16, 2007 created a controversy and this is also attributed to the eventual dismissal of the Chief Justice by President General Pervez Musharraf . However, CJ Iftikhar M.Chaudhry reinstated on 16 March 2009 due to the pressure from lawyers,civil society,political parties and Army. It is a definite ‘must read’ for all Pakistanis

Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad
Pakistan

My Lord:
I write this letter as an Officer of the Supreme Court of Pakistan; as an Advocate enrolled in the apex Court since 1984 and in the High Courts since 1972; as an Attorney who has paid more income tax from his earnings in the legal profession than many of my friends, colleagues and seniors elevated to the Bench; and as a stake-holder in the dispensation of justice, intimately and vitally interested in the functioning of the Supreme Court.

Many judges who adorn the Bench in the Supreme Court and the High Court know me over decades, as a person endowed by nature with a pleasant disposition and acceptance of human failings. Towards the courts, my approach has always been of consistent and continuous display of respect and humility. I bow out of conviction, not compulsion. I use the words “My Lords”, because I want to, not because I have to. As an Attorney, I look up to the Court and want to see it on a high pedestal of dignity, compassion and justice, tempered with mercy.
I have seen my Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Hamood-ur-Rahman, Chief Justice Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Chief Justice S. Anwar-ul-Haq, Chief Justice Mohammad Haleem and how the Court functioned under them in the 1970s/1980s.
I witnessed the proceedings for the ouster of Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, became aware that the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, had ‘worked’ on some judges of the Supreme Court and saw the physical assault on the Court.
I was appalled at the manner in which Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan led the Supreme Court and pained at the insinuations against Justice Sheikh Riaz Ahmad, when he was the Chief Justice.
I was horrified by the establishment of a Bench of five judges constituted by Chief Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui to determine whether reduction in the retirement age for judges was constitutional or not. This was clearly designed to block your appointment. I was against the idea of Mr. Amirul Mulk Mengal being made the Chief Justice before you. Within the limits of my influence (which I readily admit to be very limited), I was totally for you to become the Chief Justice. Justice Javed Buttar is aware of my position, as is the Attorney General of Pakistan. The accelerated issue of the notification appointing you the Chief Justice put Justice Siddiqui’s move to rest.
I believed that you were vigorous, capable of lifting up the Supreme Court, creating an espirit-de-corps among your brother judges, restoring the dignity and grandeur of the apex Court, particularly considering the long tenure before you.
Alas this has not come about.
I am not perturbed by your insistence on protocol (despite my belief that the Chief Justice would rise in the eyes of everybody if he walked from his residence to the Supreme Court and hooters, police escort, flags is just fluff, not the substance of an office).
I am mildly amused at your desire to be presented a guard of honour in Peshawar. I am titillated by the appropriation of aMercedes-Benz car or is it cars, the use of the Government of the Punjab’s airplane to offer Fateha in Multan, to Sheikhupura for Fateha on a Government of the Punjab helicopter, to Hyderabad on a Government of the Sind’s plane for attending a High Court function, the huge amount spent in refurbishing the chamber and residence of the Chief Justice, the reservation for yourself of a wing in Supreme Court Judges guest house in Lahore, the permanent occupation by the Supreme Court of the official residence of the Chief Justice of Sind, who per force lives in the basement of his father’s house. As his class fellow in the Government College, Lahore, I can vouch that living in the basement will do him no harm.
I am not perturbed that Dr. Arsalaan (your son) secured 16/100 in the English paper for the Civil Services Examination, that there is a case against him in some court in Baluchistan, that from the Health Department in Baluchistan he has shifted to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), that he has obtained training in the Police Academy, that he reportedly drives a BMW 7-Series car, that there is a complaint against him with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).
My grievances and protests are different.
I am perturbed that the Supreme Court should issue a clarificatory statement on his behalf. I am perturbed that Justice (Retd.) Wajihuddin Ahmed should be constrained to advise you on television that “people who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others”. I am perturbed that the Chief Justice should summon Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman to his chambers on Dr. Arsalaan’s account.
I am appalled that you announce decisions in Court, while in the written judgment an opposite conclusion is recorded.
In the Petition for leave to appeal filed by Dr. Sher Afghan Niazi, Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs (in which Respondent’s Counsels were Mr. Khalid Anwar and Mr. Qadir Saeed), you refused to grant leave in open Court and yet in the written order, leave was granted to Dr. Sher Afghan Niazi.
On 15-2-2007, Mr. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim complained that in open Court you had accepted his appeal but dismissed the same in the judgement, subsequently recorded.
If Mr. Khalid Anwar, a former Minister of Law and Parliamentary Affairs, and Mr Fakrhuddin, Senior Counsel, are treated in this manner, the fate of lesser known lawyers would certainly be far worse.
My grievances also concern the manner in which the last and highest court of appeal is dispensing justice, under your leadership.
My Lord, the dignity of lawyers is consistently being violated by you. We are treated harshly, rudely, brusquely and nastily. We are not heard. We are not allowed to present our case. There is little scope for advocacy. The words used in the Bar Room for Court No. 1 are “the slaughter house”. We are cowed down by aggression from the Bench, led by you. All we receive from you is arrogance, aggression and belligerence. You also throw away the file, while contemptuously announcing: “This is dismissed”.
Yet this aggression is not for everyone. When Mr. Sharifuddin Pirzada appears, your Lordship’s demeanour and appearance is not just sugar and honey. You are obsequious to the point of meekness. So apart from violating our dignity, which the Constitution commands to be inviolable, we suffer discrimination in your Court.
I am not raising the issue of verbal onslaughts and threats to Police Officers and other Civil Servants, who have the misfortune to be summoned, degraded and reminded that “This is the Supreme Court”.
The way in which My Lord conducts proceedings is not conducive to the process of justice. In fact, it obstructs due process and constitutes contempt of the Supreme Court itself.
I am pained at the wide publicity to cases taken up by My Lord in the Supreme Court under the banner of Fundamental Rights. The proceedings before the Supreme Court can conveniently and easily be referred to the District and Sessions Judges. I am further pained by the media coverage of the Supreme Court on the recovery of a female. In the bar room, this is referred to as a “Media Circus”.
My Lord, this communication may anger you and you are in any case prone to get angry in a flash, but do reflect upon it. Perhaps you are not cognizant of what your brother judges feel and say about you.
My Lord, before a rebellion arises among your brother judges (as in the case of Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah), before the Bar stands up collectively and before the entire matter is placed before the Supreme Judicial Council, there may be time to change and make amends.
I hope you have the wisdom and courage to make these amends and restore serenity, calm, compassion, patience and justice tempered with mercy to my Supreme Court.
My Lord, we all live in the womb of time and are judged, both by the present and by history. The judgement about you, being rendered in the present, is adverse in the extreme.

Yours faithfully,
NAEEM BOKHARI
Advocate
Supreme Court of
Pakistan
Islamabad, Pakistan