Salahuddin Ahmed Profile picture
May 11 8 tweets 2 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
Al Qadir Trust case against IK perfectly captures venality of ALL our ruling elite - politicians, judges, generals, businessmen & media.

So long as anti-corruption laws are used only for political victimisation instead of true accountability - we can never end corruption. (1/n)
Malik Riaz illegally built BTK on encroached land. His partnership with the PPP leadership is documented & his land grab was actively aided by Sindh govt, Malir Development Authority, Sindh police as well as our security agencies. (2/n)
But after scam was exposed by brave journos like @naziha_syedali at Dawn prompting initial Suo Motu; SC stopped NAB enquiry against him & regularised land grab (on payment of PKR 460 billion fine). Won’t get into who in security establishment is said to have brokered deal. (3/n)
In unrelated proceedings, UK govt froze GBP 190 million assets belonging to Malik Riaz saying they were proceeds of corruption from Pakistan. MR agreed to settle case by giving up those assets. Pakistan govt. was entitled to receive those assets. (4/n)
But IK & PTI Cabinet agreed to let this money be used to pay off the BTK fine owed by Malik Riaz over opposition of people like @mazari! In return, Malik Riaz gifted land worth billions to a trust owned by Imran Khan & Bushra! Can’t get clearer proof of bribery than that! (5/n)
SC happily let public money be used to pay off MR’s BTK fine. This did not impact SC’s dignity (seems only arrests from court premises qualify 😄). But when apps filed in SC seeking details of money paid by MR & actual boundaries of BTK; Registrar said it was confidential! (6/n)
Now PDM govt initiates case against IK for taking bribes from unnamed “property tycoon”. How do you prove case if you don’t dare implicate MR! Al rashi wal murtashi?
Our media reports whole story absent MR’s name!😂 When MR’s name taken on @HamidMirPAK show, Geo bleeps! (7/n)
No one actually gives a damn about corruption. Whether it’s this govt or past one, military, judiciary, NAB, media - nearly all the actors only interested in using cloak of accountability to further their political interests.

What a circus!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Salahuddin Ahmed

Salahuddin Ahmed Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SalAhmedPK

Apr 5
So @Matiullahjan919 makes a point all lawyers should ponder. It’s ok for judges to be strict textualists. It’s ok for them to be purposivists.

But when same bench switches from radical purposivism to strict textualism in space of 3-months; it rightly invites questions. (1/6)
Textualism v purposivism is not a binary. It’s a spectrum. But people must not dance around the spectrum depending on the petitioner in front of them.

So let’s apply the “deeper understandings” & “spirit of the Constitution” logic used by same 3-member bench in 63-A case (2/6)
Yes, text of constitution says CM may advise dissolution & elections must be done 90-days thereafter. But overriding object of Constitution as set in Art 2-A & 218 is conduct of “honest, just & fair” elections. In line with that object through 18th Amdmt idea of caretaker (3/6)
Read 6 tweets
Jan 23
Thread:
These Shaukat Khanum financial statements are interesting. Thanks for sharing @wasioabbasi. SKMT invests $3m in real estate project in Oman in 2008 & exits investment in 2015 after 7-years only getting original $3m back. Bad investment? Sure. But is it bad faith? (1/n)
What intrigued me was why SKMT invested in Omani real estate in the first place. Charitable endowments are not private equity firms. Their investments are usually (& should be) held in safe govt bonds & bonds/shares of blue-chip Cos & not speculative real estate projects (2/n)
SKMT’s statements shed some light. A Co. called Sugarland launched a real estate project in Oman. Sugarland, in turn, was owned by HBG Investment based in Dubai along with an Arab partner who contributed the land for the project. SKMT decided to invest $3 mln in the project.(3/n)
Read 9 tweets
Jul 27, 2022
3-member SC bench’s explanation why it doesn’t have to follow own 8-member judgment in 2015 holding “decision of the party as to how to vote has been conferred upon the party head”:
1. Because other judges in 2015 case didn’t refer to this issue so we can ignore 8 who did (1/4)
2. Those 8 judges (including CJP Umar Ata Bandial) were saying something irrelevant to the case.
3. The observations of those 8 judges were made in ignorance of the law (per incurium)
4.They were just “passing remarks” (2/4)
5. Even if CJP earlier “unconsciously” signed a judgment that was wrong, he can now correct his mistake.
6. In 2015 we didn’t treat Art 63-A as seriously as we now have.
Thus instead of forming a Full Court to reconsider matter - we can just ignore our earlier finding. (3/4)
Read 4 tweets
Dec 9, 2020
Islamabad Bar Association (IBA) has filed petition before SC seeking judicial inquiry into ousted judge Shaukat Siddiqui’s startling disclosures. Siddiqui stated on on oath before Supreme Judicial Council that then CJ of Islamabad High Court had fixed benches as per ISI’s wishes.
Also, that a certain (named) Maj Gen and two Brigadiers of ISI visited him (Siddiqui) at home and in his office to urge him to pass orders against Nawaz Sharif. He was told if he complied, he would become CJ. But after his refusal, SJC started baseless proceedings against him.
SJC ousted Siddiqui as judge without any inquiry or allowing any evidence re his allegations. SJC held regardless whether Siddiqui’s allegations were true or not; by making such allegations publicly Siddiqui breached the Code of Conduct & was liable to be removed for that alone.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(