Experts, senior lawyers, journalists who earlier misrepresented the SC order re J. Isa as “blanket immunity” for all judges for all time -providing fuel for vile campaigns against the judges who passed the order- should hang their head in shame after reading the detailed judgment
The detailed judgment reiterates importance of judicial accountability, but correctly emphasises that accountability for judges too must be done in accordance with law
Since the the SC referral to FBR was set aside in review, all subsequence proceedings were declared illegal
See also J. Afridi’s opinion related to Shahzad Akbar + Law Minister Farogh Naseem
That PM Imran Khan allowed them to continue in important positions of authority belies elementary principles of good governance and exposes the PM’s complicity in said violations, writes J. Afridi
J. Afridi in his separate opinion also says penal consequences for breach of confidentiality of tax filers under the Income Tax Ordinance are attracted in the present case against:
A snapshot into constitutional and human rights jurisprudence of Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who will be the Chief Justice of Pakistan from 2 Feb 2022 to 17 September 2023
1. In 2015, he was part of the 21st amendment judgment, which held trial of civilians for terrorism by military courts did not violate right to fair trial or judicial independence
Judgment also said it is for the govt - not courts - to ensure its conduct doesn’t violate int. law
2. In the same case, he was one of the judges who held Parliament’s powers to amend the Constitution was subject to “implied limitations”, and that SC had power to strike down constitutional amendments if they substantively altered the Constitution’s “salient features”
RUDA relied on feasibility studies prepared by Meinhard - studies that had earlier been rejected by LDA and
Meinhard blacklisted for “capricious and uncondonable incompetence”
The CEO of RUDA is a former employee of Meinhardt
S. 6 of RUDA Act obligated RUDA to prepare a Master Plam with agreement of the Local Govt, which it failed to do
Punjab Govt later passed and ordinance to amend RUDA Act and omit this requirement with retrospective effect
Court struck down amendment, incl. on the basis of 140A
Significantly, LHC calls for a “paradigm shift” in acquisition of “agricultural and cultivated farmland”
Since this is a matter of right to life, Land Acquisition Act must be read down + laws should be made keeping in view the socio-economic and ecological development of Punjab
On 12 April 2021, Saad Rizvi was arrested and preventively detained under the Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960
This was shortly after his meeting with TLP leadership in Lahore, when the party announced nationwide protests
2. The detention order was initially for 30 days, but was later extended twice to continue until 10 July
The MPO allows for preventive detention for a maximum of 90 days, after which a Review Board comprising of high court judges has to authorise any further detention
3. The Punjab Govt made a reference to extend Rizvi’s detention before a Review Board
On 2 July, the Review Board found there were no sufficient grounds to justify further detention
The Board therefore declined the Govt’s request for extension and directed Rizvi’s release
That ARY lost a defamation case in UK in 2016 for accusing Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman of treason is well-known
What is less known is Ofcom also upheld two complaints made by MSR against New Vision (which rebroadcasts ARY) in 2017
Interestingly, both complaints involve PM Imran Khan
The first complaint was about Imran Khan’s interview in Power Play in Nov 2017, where he accused MSR of being “bought” (by Nawaz Sharif) and alleged Geo has the “task to save a corrupt person”
Ofcom found the unsubstantiated, one-sides allegations constituted unfair treatment
The second was about how the channel aired Imran Khan’s speech at a rally, where he once again attacked MSR, Geo
The channel ran captions such as “Media’s godfather is taking money to defend the Sharif family - Imran khan”
Once again, Ofcom found MSR had been treated unfairly
The recent debate on China’s development is a response to PM Imran Khan’s claim that China’s political model is superior to “western democracy”
And how the CPC achieved rapid growth and poverty reduction due to transparency, meritocracy and holding elites accountable
This is a very problematic claim. Not only does it view development narrowly and excludes human rights/political freedoms from its ambit, it also misses the role of corruption - including institutionalised forms of corruption - as an enabler of rapid economic growth in China
Dr Ang does not deny “access money” (a kind of corruption) is an important part of China’s growth story, but warns such growth is distorted and carries risks (hence her term “steroids of capitalism”)
This is a cautionary tale for countries seeking to emulate China -not a defence
UN human rights mechanisms have repeatedly raised serious concern about the rights of Muslims in France
For example, in 2007, the UN Independent Expert on Minority Issues highlighted “intolerance, suspicion, and misunderstanding of Islam and growing islamophobia” in the country
In 2015, in its assessment of France’s compliance with ICCPR, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the resurgence of “racist and xenophobic discourse” in public and political spheres, and highlighted upsurge in hate crimes, including against Muslims
In the same year, UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination said France should distance itself from “racist hate speech” and “Islamophobic discourse” emanating from certain political circles, media
It also urged France bring perpetrators of hate crimes to account