6 Judges of the Islamabad High Court have written a letter to the Supreme Court Judicial Council of Pakistan, whose head is the Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, complaining of the interference in their work, threats, and snooping on them by Pakistan’s Intelligence Agencies
The lawyers have called a convention to discuss this brazen attack on the independence of the judiciary
For quite some time it has been noticed in Pakistan that Court orders are not obeyed. For instance, the order of the Supreme Court to hold elections for the Punjab Legislative Assembly on 14th May, 2023, was simply thrown into the waste paper basket.
The latest revelations in the letter of 6 Hon’ble Judges of the Islamabad High Court shows brazen interference by the executive with the judiciary.
This takes us into the question why have a judiciary at all ?
It is in the nature of things that in every society, in all ages, there were, and will be, some disputes between the people, or between the people and the authorities. Hence there has to be a forum for peaceful resolution of these disputes, on the basis of some established principles, by professional experts who are conversant with these principles, known as Judges, otherwise they will be resolved violently by guns, bombs, swords, or lathis. Hence the purpose of a judiciary is to preserve peace in society.
A person presents his case in court, as does his adversary, and then the judge gives his verdict. Even if a party loses, he has the satisfaction that he was given a hearing, and this pacifies him to some extent.
But this presumes that the Judge was honest, impartial, and independent. In Pakistan, unfortunately, these features are missing. An example of this is the clearly dishonest verdict of the 3 Judge bench of the Pakistan Supreme Court, presided over by the Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, which deprived Imran Khan’s PTI party of its symbol
A Pakistani journalist, Sohrab Barkat, of the social media forum siasat.pk, who is based in Islamabad, asked me what I would have done in this situation had I been the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
I told him I would have taken a very tough stand. I would have closed down all courts in Pakistan until the government gives a solemn assurance that it will obey court orders ( subject of course to provisions for review, or appeal to a higher court ), and will respect the independence of the judiciary.
I would have also sent to jail for contempt of court those who defied court orders, however high the person or persons may be
Unfortunately the former CJP Bandial, and the present CJP Qazi Faez Isa, have proved to be spineless in this regard, and the latter has proved to be servile to the Pakistan Establishment, and a disgrace to the judiciary, like a modern Judge Jeffreys.
A month-long protest by wrestlers at Jantar Mantar is being supported by multiple organizations, in response to allegations made by players. These allegations have led to the filing of cases against BJP MP Braj Bhushan Singh, as ordered by the Supreme Court.
On joining this movement of political and caste organizations, Kshatriya Mahasabha held an important meeting in Dharamshala established by Kshatriya Chetak Samaj. Workers of Kshatriya Mahasabha from all over the country participated in this meeting.
During a meeting, Mahendra Singh Tanwar, the National President of All India Kshatriya Mahasabha, expressed his concern regarding the current situation in the country.
He stated that when there are allegations made against a person, it is crucial to conduct a fair investigation in their context.
However, he also observed that several caste and regional organizations are supporting the movement, which may ignite further tensions and lead to the deterioration of brotherhood in the country.
He emphasized the need for caution and urged everyone to work towards promoting unity and harmony in society.
Kshatriya considers Shriram as his role model and has been at the forefront of fighting against injustice. He has made significant sacrifices to ensure the safety and well-being of society. Most recently, the Akhil Bhartiya Kshatriya Mahasabha organized a Social Harmony Tour, a nationwide bus journey aimed at promoting unity across all sections of society.
The All India Kshatriya Mahasabha conducted three meetings in Noida, Delhi, and Gurugram to discuss the Brajbhushan and Anand Mohan incident.
The meetings were attended by several members, including National Vice President Dr. Ashok Chauhan and DP Singh Rithala, legal advisor Supreme Court veteran lawyer AP Singh, Media Advisor Badri Nath, Punjab Province President Dimple Rana, Delhi Pradesh President Dhyan Pal Singh Jadaun, Jabar Singh, Haryana Pradesh President Chhagan Singh Rathore, and Uttar Pradesh representative Dr. OP Singh, as well as officials from different parts of the country.
Honor of Judiciary is paramount but Akhil Bhartiya Kshatriya Mahasabha will not tolerate excesses of caste organizations: Mahendra Singh Tanwar – Kashmir News
John Roberts, the US supreme court chief justice, has declined to testify at a forthcoming hearing before the Senate judiciary committee that is expected to focus on judicial ethics.
The committee’s Democratic chairman, Dick Durbin, had asked the chief justice to appear before the panel to address potential reforms to ethical rules governing the justices. The senator cited “a steady stream of revelations regarding justices falling short of the ethical standards”.
Roberts’ brief response, issued by a supreme court spokesperson, said he would “respectfully decline” the invitation. In a letter to Durbin, Roberts said such appearances by chief justices were exceedingly rare given concerns about the separation of powers between the branches of US government and the “importance of preserving judicial independence”.
Durbin had earlier asked Roberts to investigate ties between Justice Clarence Thomas and a wealthy Republican donor.
Thomas, the longest-serving of the court’s nine justices, has been under pressure after published reports by the news outlet ProPublica detailing his relationship with Harlan Crow, including real estate purchases and luxury travel paid for by the billionaire Dallas businessman.
In a statement on Tuesday, Durbin said: “I am surprised that the chief justice’s recounting of existing legal standards of ethics suggests current law is adequate and ignores the obvious. The actions of one justice, including trips on yachts and private jets, were not reported to the public. That same justice failed to disclose the sale of properties he partly owned to a party with interests before the supreme court.”
The Senate judiciary committee would proceed with a 2 May hearing as planned, according to Durbin.
“It is time for Congress to accept its responsibility to establish an enforceable code of ethics for the supreme court, the only agency of our government without it,” Durbin said.
[ad_2]
#Chief #Justice #John #Roberts #declines #Senate #judiciary #hearing
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
He later told reporters outside the hearing: “It is really troubling that Americans’ taxpayer dollars are being used to come here on this junket to do an examination of the safest big city in America.”
A rowdy crowd of anti-Trump protestors demanded to be let inside the federal building in lower Manhattan as the committee heard testimony from a formerly incarcerated bodega clerk and the mother of a homicide victim, among others who testified.
The hearing — titled “Victims of Violent Crime in Manhattan” — was called by the committee in the wake of the arraignment of the former president, who, ever since being criminally indicted by a grand jury in Manhattan, has attacked Alvin Bragg, the district attorney leading the case, for not addressing local crime instead.
His GOP allies have leveled similar criticisms. Rep. Jim Jordan, who chairs the committee, called New York a “city that has lost its way” during the hearing.
“Here in Manhattan, the scales of justice are weighed down by politics,” Jordan later added during the hearing, accusing Bragg of taking a “soft-on-crime approach to the real criminals.”
The mayor and other Democrats were quick to point out Monday that crime in many major categories is on the decline. A letter sent to Jordan last week cited recently released NYPD statistics showing murders are down roughly a tenth from at this time last year. Shootings and transit crimes have decreased, too.
The full picture of crime statistics in New York is more of a mixed bag, though. Felony assaults are up, driven largely by domestic incidents and attacks on police officers, and major felony arrests are at a high not seen in more than two decades.
Adams also pointed to data reported in the New York Daily News Monday morning suggesting that residents of Jordan’s home state of Ohio are far more likely to die from gun violence than New Yorkers.
Wirepoints, an Illinois-based nonprofit, found in February that New York City had among the lowest homicide rates among the nation’s largest cities.
Adams said neither he nor anyone from his administration was asked to speak.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat, who represents New York’s 13th District, also took issue with Republicans on the committee criticizing crime in the state without backing stronger federal gun control legislation.
“The common denominator in most homicides across the country is a gun,” he said during the hearing.
The GOP’s embrace of the issue of crime in their attacks against Bragg — and the other side’s full-throated response — is indicative of just how salient the issue remains in New York politics, and of its soreness for Democrats in the wake of midterm losses and a much closer than anticipated gubernatorial race. Even public safety-focused Democrats like Adams have struggled to make voters think they’re making headway on the issue.
Manhattan Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler, a former chair of the committee, warned voters not to be “fooled.”
“This hearing is being called for one reason and one reason only: to protect Donald Trump,” he said at the news conference with Adams.
[ad_2]
#Hypocrisy #York #Democrats #deride #Judiciary #Committees #Manhattan #hearing
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“Dianne will get better. She will come back to work. And she’s already told Senator Schumer … that he can replace her on the judiciary committee if it’s urgent for these hearings for judges,” Gillibrand said, referencing Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“She’s a team player, and she’s an extraordinary member of the Senate,” Gillibrand said. “It’s her right. She’s been voted by her state to be senator for six years. She has the right, in my opinion, to decide when she steps down.”
Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) also praised Feinstein’s decision to step down from the committee and supported her decision to remain in the Senate.
“I wish her well. I hope she returns to the Senate very soon,” Baldwin said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
And Feinstein’s colleagues should “take her at her word,” that she intends to return to the office, Klobuchar said.
“I think she made the right decision to step off the Judiciary Committee. I serve on that committee, and we cannot advance judges or legislation with a missing person because of the close vote,” Klobuchar said on ABC’s “This Week.”
But if her absence continues for an extended length, “then she’s going to have to make a decision with her family and her friends about what her future holds,” Klobuchar said. “Because this isn’t just about California, it’s also about the nation. And we just can’t — with this one vote margin — and expect every other person to be there every single time.”
Democrats will need Feinstein’s vote, Klobuchar said, especially as Congress readies itself for a debt-ceiling standoff.
Feinstein, who was first elected in 1992, has already said she will not seek another term in 2024.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) called for Feinstein to step down last week, as Senate Democrats face an ongoing struggle to confirm President Joe Biden’s judicial picks without her vote.
Khanna doubled down on his call for Feinstein to step down immediately during an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”
“Only in Washington would you get criticized for saying something so obvious,” he said to host Shannon Bream. “I have a lot of respect for Senator Feinstein, but she’s missed 75 percent of votes at this year. She has not been showing up and she has no intention. We don’t know if she’s even going to show up. She has no return date.”
[ad_2]
#Senators #praise #Feinsteins #decision #step #Judiciary #Committee
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
For Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, next month’s election is of massive historical significance.
It falls 100 years after the foundation of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s secular republic and, if Erdoğan wins, he will be empowered to put even more of his stamp on the trajectory of a geostrategic heavyweight of 85 million people. The fear in the West is that he will see this as his moment to push toward an increasingly religiously conservative model, characterized by regional confrontationalism, with greater political powers centered around himself.
The election will weigh heavily on security in Europe and the Middle East. Who is elected stands to define: Turkey’s role in the NATO alliance; its relationship with the U.S., the EU and Russia; migration policy; Ankara’s role in the war in Ukraine; and how it handles tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean.
The May 14 vote is expected to be the most hotly contested race in Erdoğan’s 20-year rule — as the country grapples with years of economic mismanagement and the fallout from a devastating earthquake.
He will face an opposition aligned behind Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, nicknamed the “Turkish Gandhi,” who is promising big changes. Polls suggest Kılıçdaroğlu has eked out a lead, but Erdoğan is a hardened election campaigner, with the full might of the state and its institutions at his back.
“There will be a change from an authoritarian single-man rule, towards a kind of a teamwork, which is a much more democratic process,” Ünal Çeviköz, chief foreign policy adviser to Kılıçdaroğlu told POLITICO. “Kılıçdaroğlu will be the maestro of that team.”
Here are the key foreign policy topics in play in the vote:
EU and Turkish accession talks
Turkey’s opposition is confident it can unfreeze European Union accession talks — at a standstill since 2018 over the country’s democratic backsliding — by introducing liberalizing reforms in terms of rule of law, media freedoms and depoliticization of the judiciary.
The opposition camp also promises to implement European Court of Human Rights decisions calling for the release of two of Erdoğan’s best-known jailed opponents: the co-leader of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party Selahattin Demirtaş and human rights defender Osman Kavala.
“This will simply give the message to all our allies, and all the European countries, that Turkey is back on track to democracy,” Çeviköz said.
Even under a new administration, however, the task of reopening the talks on Turkey’s EU accession is tricky.
Turkey’s opposition is aligned behind Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, nicknamed the “Turkish Gandhi” | Burak Kara/Getty Images
Anti-Western feeling in Turkey is very strong across the political spectrum, argued Wolfango Piccoli, co-founder of risk analysis company Teneo.
“Foreign policy will depend on the coherence of the coalition,” he said. “This is a coalition of parties who have nothing in common apart from the desire to get rid of Erdoğan. They’ve got a very different agenda, and this will have an impact in foreign policy.”
“The relationship is largely comatose, and has been for some time, so, they will keep it on life support,” he said, adding that any new government would have so many internal problems to deal with that its primary focus would be domestic.
Europe also seems unprepared to handle a new Turkey, with a group of countries — most prominently France and Austria — being particularly opposed to the idea of rekindling ties.
“They are used to the idea of a non-aligned Turkey, that has departed from EU norms and values and is doing its own course,” said Aslı Aydıntaşbaş a visiting fellow at Brookings. “If the opposition forms a government, it will seek a European identity and we don’t know Europe’s answer to that; whether it could be accession or a new security framework that includes Turkey.”
“Obviously the erosion of trust has been mutual,” said former Turkish diplomat Sinan Ülgen, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Europe think tank, arguing that despite reticence about Turkish accession, there are other areas where a complementary and mutually beneficiary framework could be built, like the customs union, visa liberalization, cooperation on climate, security and defense, and the migration agreement.
The opposition will indeed seek to revisit the 2016 agreement with the EU on migration, Çeviköz said.
“Our migration policy has to be coordinated with the EU,” he said. “Many countries in Europe see Turkey as a kind of a pool, where migrants coming from the east can be contained and this is something that Turkey, of course cannot accept,” he said but added. “This doesn’t mean that Turkey should open its borders and make the migrants flow into Europe. But we need to coordinate and develop a common migration policy.”
NATO and the US
After initially imposing a veto, Turkey finally gave the green light to Finland’s NATO membership on March 30.
But the opposition is also pledging to go further and end the Turkish veto on Sweden, saying that this would be possible by the alliance’s annual gathering on July 11. “If you carry your bilateral problems into a multilateral organization, such as NATO, then you are creating a kind of a polarization with all the other members of NATO with your country,” Çeviköz said.
A protester pushes a cart with a RRecep Tayyip Erdoğan doll during an anti-NATO and anti-Turkey demonstration in Sweden | Jonas Gratzer/Getty Images
A reelected Erdoğan could also feel sufficiently empowered to let Sweden in, many insiders argue. NATO allies did, after all, play a significant role in earthquake aid. Turkish presidential spokesperson İbrahim Kalın says that the door is not closed to Sweden, but insists the onus is on Stockholm to determine how things proceed.
Turkey’s military relationship with the U.S. soured sharply in 2019 when Ankara purchased the Russian-made S-400 missile system, a move the U.S. said would put NATO aircraft flying over Turkey at risk. In response, the U.S. kicked Ankara out of the F-35 jet fighter program and slapped sanctions on the Turkish defense industry.
A meeting in late March between Kılıçdaroğlu and the U.S. Ambassador to Ankara Jeff Flake infuriated Erdoğan, who saw it as an intervention in the elections and pledged to “close the door” to the U.S. envoy. “We need to teach the United States a lesson in this elections,” the irate president told voters.
In its policy platform, the opposition makes a clear reference to its desire to return to the F-35 program.
Russia and the war in Ukraine
After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Turkey presented itself as a middleman. It continues to supply weapons — most significantly Bayraktar drones — to Ukraine, while refusing to sanction Russia. It has also brokered a U.N. deal that allows Ukrainian grain exports to pass through the blockaded Black Sea.
Highlighting his strategic high-wire act on Russia, after green-lighting Finland’s NATO accession and hinting Sweden could also follow, Erdoğan is now suggesting that Turkey could be the first NATO member to host Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“Maybe there is a possibility” that Putin may travel to Turkey on April 27 for the inauguration of the country’s first nuclear power reactor built by Russian state nuclear energy company Rosatom, he said.
Çeviköz said that under Kılıçdaroğlu’s leadership, Turkey would be willing to continue to act as a mediator and extend the grain deal, but would place more stress on Ankara’s status as a NATO member.
“We will simply emphasize the fact that Turkey is a member of NATO, and in our discussions with Russia, we will certainly look for a relationship among equals, but we will also remind Russia that Turkey is a member of NATO,” he said.
Turkey’s relationship with Russia has become very much driven by the relationship between Putin and Erdoğan and this needs to change, Ülgen argued.
Turkey brokered a U.N. deal that allows Ukrainian grain exports to pass through the blockaded Black Sea | Ozan Kose/AFP via Getty Images
“No other Turkish leader would have the same type of relationship with Putin, it would be more distant,” he said. “It does not mean that Turkey would align itself with the sanctions; it would not. But nonetheless, the relationship would be more transparent.”
Syria and migration
The role of Turkey in Syria is highly dependent on how it can address the issue of Syrians living in Turkey, the opposition says.
Turkey hosts some 4 million Syrians and many Turks, battling a major cost-of-living crisis, are becoming increasingly hostile. Kılıçdaroğlu has pledged to create opportunities and the conditions for the voluntary return of Syrians.
“Our approach would be to rehabilitate the Syrian economy and to create the conditions for voluntary returns,” Çeviköz said, adding that this would require an international burden-sharing, but also establishing dialogue with Damascus.
Erdoğan is also trying to establish a rapprochement with Syria but Syrian President Bashar al-Assad says he will only meet the Turkish president when Ankara is ready to completely withdraw its military from northern Syria.
“A new Turkish government will be more eager to essentially shake hands with Assad,” said Ülgen. “But this will remain a thorny issue because there will be conditions attached on the side of Syria to this normalization.”
However, Piccoli from Teneo said voluntary returns of Syrians was “wishful thinking.”
“These are Syrians who have been living in Turkey for more than 10 years, their children have been going to school in Turkey from day one. So, the pledges of sending them back voluntarily, it is very questionable to what extent they can be implemented.”
Greece and the East Med
Turkey has stepped up its aggressive rhetoric against Greece in recent months, with the Erdoğan even warning that a missile could strike Athens.
But the prompt reaction by the Greek government and the Greek community to the recent devastating earthquakes in Turkey and a visit by the Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias created a new backdrop for bilateral relations.
A Turkish drill ship before it leaves for gas exploration | Adem Altan/AFP via Getty Images
Dendias, along with his Turkish counterpart Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, announced that Turkey would vote for Greece in its campaign for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council for 2025-26 and that Greece would support the Turkish candidacy for the General Secretariat of the International Maritime Organization.
In another sign of a thaw, Greek Defense Minister Nikos Panagiotopoulos and Migration Minister Notis Mitarachi visited Turkey this month, with Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar saying he hoped that the Mediterranean and Aegean would be a “sea of friendship” between the two countries. Akar said he expected a moratorium with Greece in military and airforce exercises in the Aegean Sea between June 15 and September 15.
“Both countries are going to have elections, and probably they will have the elections on the same day. So, this will open a new horizon in front of both countries,” Çeviköz said.
“The rapprochement between Turkey and Greece in their bilateral problems [in the Aegean], will facilitate the coordination in addressing the other problems in the eastern Mediterranean, which is a more multilateral format,” he said. Disputes over maritime borders and energy exploration, for example, are common.
As far as Cyprus is concerned, Çeviköz said that it is important for Athens and Ankara not to intervene into the domestic politics of Cyprus and the “two peoples on the island should be given an opportunity to look at their problems bilaterally.”
However, analysts argue that Greece, Cyprus and the EastMed are fundamental for Turkey’s foreign policy and not much will change with another government. The difference will be more one of style.
“The approach to manage those differences will change very much. So, we will not hear aggressive rhetoric like: ‘We will come over one night,’” said Ülgen. “We’ll go back to a more mature, more diplomatic style of managing differences and disputes.”
“The NATO framework will be important, and the U.S. would have to do more in terms of re-establishing the sense of balance in the Aegean,” said Aydıntaşbaş. But, she argued, “you just cannot normalize your relations with Europe or the U.S., unless you’re willing to take that step with Greece.”
[ad_2]
#2023s #important #election #Turkey
( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )
Guwahati: Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on Friday that the state government has withdrawn at least 27,000 cases related to minor crimes with an aim to reduce the burden on the judiciary.
Attending the platinum jubilee celebrations of Gauhati High Court, Sarma said, “For facilitating ease of justice, the Assam government took a decision of withdrawing petty offence cases to bring down the pendency of cases.
“Cases punishable for up to three years with or without fine were taken into consideration for withdrawal, barring the cases of heinous nature,” Sarma said, adding that till February this year, around 27,000 such cases have been withdrawn and it is estimated that through this action around one lakh criminal cases will be disposed of.
Sarma also asserted that this will reduce the load on lower courts.
The Chief Minister hailed the role played by the Gauhati High Court as the true guardian of human rights, protector of the Constitution and promoter of the age-old democratic ethos.
He mentioned that the Gauhati High Court has a unique identity for being the common high court for all the seven states of the northeast for a longer span of its existence.
“This court has been dealing with the fascinating task of interpreting enacted laws as well as tribal laws and customs and has judicial authority on subjects falling under the 6th Schedule of the Constitution of India, which is unique to this region only,” Sarma said.
The Chief Minister also expressed his commitment to create as many posts as required in the lower judiciary with adequate infrastructure.
He said, “The state government has decided to create a new campus of Gauhati High Court, work for which will start this year.”
Islamabad: Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has convened a meeting of the National Security Council (NSC) for Friday, amid the widening chasm between the judiciary and the federal government over holding polls in the country’s politically crucial Punjab province.
Pakistan’s parliament on Thursday passed a resolution rejecting the country’s Supreme Court’s decision about the Punjab elections delay case and demanded a full court to decide on this vexing issue.
A three-member bench of the apex court led by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial on Tuesday fixed May 14 as the new date for elections to the Punjab Assembly, as it quashed the Election Commission of Pakistan’s decision to extend the polls date from April 10 to October 8.
The top civil and military leadership will participate in the NSC meeting while the heads of the country’s intelligence agencies will brief the participants on the national security situation, according to The Express Tribune newspaper.
The meeting is scheduled to take place at 11am on Friday at the Prime Minister House, the report said.
The NSC is a federal institutional and consultative body chaired by the Prime Minister of Pakistan as its chairman.
It is a principal forum that is mandated for considering national security and foreign policy matters with the senior national security advisers and Cabinet ministers. In the latest development, the National Assembly or the lower house passed a resolution to reject the decision of the apex court.
The resolution was moved by lawmaker Khalid Magsi of Balochistan Awami Party which is part of the ruling coalition and it was adopted by the lower house.
It called upon the Prime Minister Sharif and the federal cabinet not to implement this judgment as it is contrary to the Constitution.
The resolution came after Sharif addressing the cabinet meeting on Wednesday described the apex court’s decision as a “mockery of the Constitution and law,” and added that it could not be implemented.
His idea was supported by the National Assembly, showing the bitter divide over the date of election in Punjab where the assembly was dissolved on January 13 and the polls should be held within 90 days.
The federal government asserts that it has powers to delay the polls and hold it with the general elections in the country after August this year.
However, former prime minister Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party has been pushing for early polls and demanding that instead of delaying the elections in the Punjab province, the national assembly should be dissolved and general elections called in the country.
