DAWN.COM

Today's Paper | May 01, 2024

Published 20 Sep, 2017 07:25am

‘Sharifs and court’

THIS refers to your editorial ‘The path ahead for Sharifs & court’ (Sept 16). The observation that “ the Supreme Court verdict against Mr Sharif was disappointing from a strictly legal perspective” is reprehensible and uncalled for. Such unwarranted comments question the competence, jurisdiction and locus standi of the country’s highest judicial forum, which gave numerous opportunities to the Sharifs to defend themselves.

Nawaz Sharif is fortunate that he got the chance to submit a review petition against the disqualification verdict of the Supreme Court. It is a different matter that his lawyers were unable to submit a single defence argument in front of the review bench. It is recalled that there was no review appeal filing in ZAB’s death case, nor was this privilege availed of by Saulat Mirza after the confirmation of his death conviction.

According to the rules, the review appeal is heard by the same bench as announces the judgement. Forming a new bench or a larger bench would be amount to reopening the case. There is no reason why Mr Sharif should have been given an exception in the case.

Arshad M. Khawaja

Karachi

(2)

APROPOS the editorial ‘The path ahead for Sharifs and court’ (Sept 16). I refer to a sentence: “….institutions, particularly the judiciary, need to demonstrate that faith in the constitutional democratic process is justified.” I am not sure what your editorial was trying to say.

Faith in any constitutional democratic process is just that, a matter of faith. And what such faith requires of all players in the game is that the process be respected and that no player should feel he has the right to manage or manipulate the process because he thinks he knows better.

But whose faith, exactly, in the constitutional democratic process, as you call it, was the editorial questioning? Those who believe that governments should be both elected and removed by the electorate? Or those who believe that they are sometimes (often!) obliged to take matters into their own hands for the good of the people, who really aren’t clever or educated enough to choose and remove their own leaders, and therefore, must act as they know better how Pakistan should be governed?

Ali Khan

Islamabad

Published in Dawn, September 20th, 2017

Read Comments

Audio leaks case: IHC's Justice Babar Sattar dismisses pleas seeking his recusal Next Story