ISI challenges SC's Faizabad sit-in verdict

[VCheng]

Correct, but it appears that the ISI's contention is that no evidence was presented pointing to any specific role of individuals in the employ of the ISI in the Dharna.

The ISI is correct in arguing that the judgement relies on speculation and rumors - Justice Isa should have stuck to the facts.

At least we can agree that no institution should be allowed to exceed its constitutional mandates, right?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yes, there is absolutely no evidence that the military is "mired in politics, manipulating elections, subverting free speech, muzzling the press and funding extremists".

In this particular case, the question is very specific - was there evidence that specifically pointed to the role of the ISI in the Faizabad Dharna? I have seen nothing beyond rumors and speculation. The job of the courts is to pass judgement on the basis of evidence and established facts. Leave the speculation and opinions based on speculation to politicians and the media.

 

[VCheng]

In this particular case, the question is very specific - was there evidence that specifically pointed to the role of the ISI in the Faizabad Dharna? I have seen nothing beyond rumors and speculation. The job of the courts is to pass judgement on the basis of evidence and established facts. Leave the speculation and opinions based on speculation to politicians and the media.

We can all also accept that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that there was anything illegal and/or extra-constitutional done by anyone. Ipsa loquitur veritatem.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

At least we can agree that no institution should be allowed to exceed its constitutional mandates, right?

Absolutely, but the judiciary needs to stay away from judgments based on speculation like these which, on the flip side, could also be written to attack political parties or elected governments.

There hasn't been as much uproar over this particular judgment because of what you mentioned earlier (the perception of the military interfering in political affairs), but imagine if the judgement had been one where the Justice had accused the PMLN or PPP of 'acting outside their constitutional mandate and undermining Pakistan' based on media & social media criticism of the PMLN & PPP being in the pockets of the US/India etc.

The judiciary needs to step back from the hyper-activist role it took on under Justice Chaudhry & focus on its core responsibility of issuing rulings based on evidence and due process.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Is the judge a chat show host or a judge of the SC?

IF the law has been broken he has the power to launch an investigation into it and has a duty to bring anyone who broke the law to justice. Why is the judge only talking? Now that cases have been bought against the judges remarks, lets see the judge present the evidence on which he made such remarks.

I know the price judges in this country are bought at - even you and I can afford one.

Correct, but it appears that the ISI's contention is that no evidence was presented pointing to any specific role of individuals in the employ of the ISI in the Dharna.

The ISI is correct in arguing that the judgement relies on speculation and rumors - Justice Isa should have stuck to the facts.

We all know what happened and how it happened.

Because it is the real center of power in fact and reality? One should accept it if true and carry on.

It is not,they have been convinced.

 

[VCheng]

Absolutely, but the judiciary needs to stay away from judgments based on speculation like these which, on the flip side, could also be written to attack political parties or elected governments.

There hasn't been as much uproar over this particular judgment because of what you mentioned earlier (the perception of the military interfering in political affairs), but imagine if the judgement had been one where the Justice had accused the PMLN or PPP of 'acting outside their constitutional mandate and undermining Pakistan' based on media & social media criticism of the PMLN & PPP being in the pockets of the US/India etc.

The judiciary needs to step back from the hyper-activist role it took on under Justice Chaudhry.

I pointed out the dangers of misguided judicial overreach during the tenure of the previous CJ, and this is only another example.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

I am not defending anybody here, but what do you expect from courts that released Nawaz Sharif for being mentally stressed.

Absolutely

 

[VCheng]

It is not,they have been convinced.

Haven't we seen enough demonstrations of such power already? Do we need to see more?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

We all know what happened and how it happened.

"We all know what happened and how it happened" is not evidence that the judiciary can use, or should use, in a court of law to formulate judgments. This is a clear case of the Judge acting beyond his mandate, and the judgement should be appealed.

 

[Imran Khan]

they want more dirt on them

 

[VCheng]

"We all know what happened and how it happened" is not evidence that the judiciary can use, or should use, in a court of law to formulate judgments. This is a clear case of the Judge acting beyond his mandate, and the judgement should be appealed.

Courts do not have the constitutional mandate to meddle in the affairs that they did recently: taxation policy, fund-raising, censorship, opinions without evidence, etc., but they were allowed to do so because it aided what was being implemented.

The irony is clear, but then again, this is Pakistan. Nothing new here.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Haven't we seen enough demonstrations of such power already? Do we need to see more?

Started from IK & Co.

"We all know what happened and how it happened" is not evidence that the judiciary can use, or should use, in a court of law to formulate judgments. This is a clear case of the Judge acting beyond his mandate, and the judgement should be appealed.

Nodoubt but then again,who is working under their mandate?
I guess the man who was giving them money at the end was working under his mandate.

 

[VCheng]

Started from IK & Co.

We should accept the claim that things are different in Naya Pakistan.

 

[Kompromat]

So a Judge can deliver a verdict without a shred of evidence?

 

[VCheng]

Nodoubt but then again,who is working under their mandate?
I guess the man who was giving them money at the end was working under his mandate.

That money is insignificant compared to the amounts mentioned in the Asghar Khan case.