Home » Blog » Such a huge audacity compared to the Parliament?

Such a huge audacity compared to the Parliament?

by Afzaal rehan
0 comment
Afzaal rehan

(Continued from previous)

Without proving the charge of rigging, you deprived millions of voters of their right to vote and representation, while appeals were pending in the High Court, everything was bulldozed. The Election Commission’s authority was undermined, in their case, one party was favored and the right to be heard was taken away from others. Companion judges were made OSD, the Quetta and Lahore registries were destroyed, and after the motion of no confidence, the assembly could not be dissolved. The Constitution is clear. Those who did not see a crack in the open constitution regarding this matter, would not have known that they would not “apply” themselves. They made benches in the morning, afternoon, and evening and broke them. What message of justice was the government sending to the judge whose scandal was being circulated in the national media? You either settle with that person or the sword of the law will be raised. Whether you reject all these facts as meaningless propaganda, but standing in front of the 20 crore people’s representatives of parliament, who are going to make laws or establish rules, you will not be able to do that. Are you also a part of Parliament, such audacity, and that too in the name of the Constitution, law, and justice? The Punjab elections have become impossible to hold, not only on May 14 but also under the shadow of any controversial person. It is not just the unity but the whole nation’s position to put an end to the tradition of rigging and instead of negotiations, take the path of justice.

Is the chair of justice small or big? Does it have a decorum or impression? Even if you people present yourselves on the biggest chair of justice, can’t you feel a little hesitation or impression to at least maintain a little bit of impartiality? Today, if Bilawal is saying that negotiations cannot be held at gunpoint, then Maulana’s argument is that the court cannot accept the judicial hammer, and judicial coercion cannot be accepted. The person who was supposed to be kept out of politics, why has the Supreme Court sat idly by while making him the center of politics? If you can create turmoil for that person, then why not for us? According to Dervish’s opinion, Maulana should not demand any kind of judicial coercion. The position should be clear and unequivocal. The Constitution should not contain any one section that contradicts other constitutional sections or demands. In addition to that, the demands for transparent elections should be fulfilled first, then the next issue should be addressed. In contrast to India, our constitutional entanglement is so complex that transparency is not possible if national and provincial elections are not held together. Similarly, if the scales of justice are not balanced, transparency becomes impossible, and then the way the benches have been formed, if they do not agree, then why should their decisions be accepted?

If someone’s entire money trail has been clarified, then why shouldn’t they be held accountable in front of the parliament? The Supreme Judicial Council should take action against them, and the kind of executive order that was issued for the restoration of Ejaz Chaudhry should also be issued here. The charges should be referred to the Charge Senior Most. When Article 184/3, which is about the complete clarification and explanation of the matter, has been determined through an act of Parliament, then who will take care of any hindrance that may arise during its implementation? Justice Qazi Faiz Isa has already explained how this power was given to the Supreme Court and that the Supreme Court does not mean a single individual. If an individual has misused this power, then they should be removed from the position. It has been a year since this position was assumed; what have they done to eliminate such a huge injustice? If our judiciary is shining the political and bureaucratic counters instead of upholding the constitution and the law, then won’t the objections of the dissenters prove to be valid that the player has left the field? But if the decisions are to be made by the council, then it would be better if the council takes care of the matter.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

About Us

Geetvhd  is a news channel of Pakistan that keeps the public and all viewers informed about the country’s situation. It has always been a priority of GTV to expose as much as possible about the most exclusive and interesting aspects of news.

Our Contact

©2023 geetvhd- All Right Reserved.