Judges and the JIT; Whats, Hows and Whys.


On the 20th of April, 2017, a five member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) passed its order in Constitutional Petition Number 29 of 2016, commonly known as the Panama Leaks Scandal/Case.

By a majority of 3 to 2 (hon’ble Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Gulzar Ahmed, JJ) dissenting, the 5 member bench ordered constitution of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) which would investigate into, and find answers to, thirteen questions put forth by the honourable bench. It was ordered that the JIT should complete the investigation and submit its final report within a period of sixty days from the date of its constitution. The Chief Justice was requested to constitute a special bench for implementation of the Judgment/Order.

In consequence, a three member special bench was constituted which then formed a six member JIT on the 5th of May, 2017, and the investigation into one of the most high profile cases in Pakistan’s history thus began.

The JIT submitted its final report, before the three member special bench, on the 10th of July, 2017. Before its constitution, during its working and after submission of its report, several questions have been raised by jurists, media persons and politicians regarding different aspects relating to the case and JIT. Some of these questions, mentioned below, will be addressed in this article. I am basing the answers on my humble understanding of the law . These questions, and my answers thereto, are;

Q.1 : Who will pass the final order in Panama Leaks Case, based on the JIT’s final report? Will a new, larger or full, bench be constituted? or

Will the original 5 member bench resume its proceedings? or

Will the 3 member special bench pass the final orders?

As deadline for submission of the final report drew closer, a debate began on our television channels as to who, or which, bench has jurisdiction to pass a final order in the Panama Case. Several analysts and legal minds opined and addressed the question. Three opinions surfaced; (i) a new bench will be constituted, (ii) the original 5 member bench would resume its proceedings since the 3 member bench may stand dissolved with submission of the JIT’s final report, and (iii) the 3 member special bench would pass a final order.

Although the judgment/order passed on the 20th April by the 5 member bench may technically be referred to as interim in nature, the bench seems to have definitively culminated its own proceedings upon pronouncing it. The power to pass a final order has been left with the 3 member special bench, which is quite clear from a bare reading of Para 3 & 4 of the Order of the Court, which states;

“3.       The JIT shall submit its periodical reports every two weeks before a Bench of this Court constituted in this behalf. The JIT shall complete the investigation and submit its final report before the said Bench within a period of sixty days from the date of its constitution. The Bench thereupon may pass appropriate orders in exercise of its powers under Articles 184(3), 187(2) and 190 of the Constitution including an order for filing a reference against respondent No. 1 and any other person having nexus with the crime if justified on the basis of the material thus brought on the record before it.


  1. It is further held that upon receipt of the reports, periodic or final of the JIT, as the case may be, the matter of disqualification of respondent No. 1 shall be considered. If found necessary for passing an appropriate order in this behalf, respondent No. 1 or any other person may be summoned and examined.”

(Bold added for emphasis)

It is crystal clear that the 5 member bench has not retained any powers or authority to pass the final order.

As regards sending of a reference to NAB, the power to pass an order in this regard has unequivocally been given to the 3 member special bench. Similarly, by implication, the power to pass an order of disqualification has also been given to the 3 member bench, since this power could be exercised either upon submission of the periodic or final report, which were to be submitted to the special bench.

This settles the question of whether the 5 member or special bench has the authority to pass a final order.

As regards constitution of a larger or full bench, it may be noted that, administratively, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is empowered to constitute a larger or full bench for adjudication upon a matter. This power, however, is usually exercised on recommendations of the bench before which a case is already pending. Since the 3 member special bench has absolutely and completely been empowered, by the 5 member bench, to conclusively adjudicate upon the matter, it is unlikely that such a recommendation would be sent, even upon the application of a party to the case.

It is thus most probable, in my opinion, that the three member special bench would pass a final order in this case. The order will decide whether the Prime Minister stands disqualified or not and if a reference against any of the Respondents, or any other person, is to be sent to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

Further, the bench has also been empowered to pass any other “appropriate” order in exercise of powers under Articles 184(3), 187(2) and 190 of the Constitution. Such order may include orders of dismissal or suspension of the head of an institution to which a reference may be sent. Thus under Article 184(3) and 187(2), the bench may order removal of the Chairman NAB. The 5 member bench has already passed damning remarks on his partiality and incompetence, which have been substantiated in the JIT’s report.


Q.2 : Do the parties, Respondents in this case, have the option of filing objections to the JIT’s report? Under what circumstances will such objections be entertained by the Court?

This question is linked with another intricate question pertaining to the legal status of JIT. Powers and status of the JIT are, in my opinion, governed by order of the 5 member bench. As opposed to a local commission or an investigation officer, the JIT is not a statutory entity. No specific powers or procedure for the JIT have been given under any law. It has instead been formed by order of the Supreme Court exercising its powers under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. JIT was formed by the Supreme Court for fetching answers to key questions raised by the court itself during proceedings on petitions. It’s legal status can thus only be defined by the court. Procedure and mandate of the JIT, as given by order of the court, was inquisitorial and by no means adversarial. Only the respondents, their witnesses or witnesses called by the JIT,  appeared before it. Neither the Petitioners, nor any witnesses put forth by them were examined. If proceedings of the JIT were to be given an adversarial tinge, it can only be done by proving that the JIT, or the court, itself acted as an “adversary” to the Respondents. Attempts have been, and are still being made, to establish this conjecture.

In my opinion, any objections filed by the Respondents will have to stand on either of the two presumptions; 1. That the JIT was undoubtedly biased or partial against the Respondents, and 2. That the JIT blatantly violated their mandate, principles of justice and legal provisions. At the moment, none of this seems even close to being established; not from what has been said before the media at least.

For instance, if the Respondents were to prove that the JIT misquoted them or their witnesses in the report, it will need to be proved, or, at the very least, a reasonable doubt will need to be created. Unless these allegations are true, it will be impossible to caste a doubt especially in the presence of video and audio recordings.

If it is alleged that the allegation of forgery and falsification is baseless, the allegers will need to prove calibri’s availability before 2007, and thus disprove Microsoft’s claim otherwise.

Thus even though parties do have a right to file objections to the JIT’s working and report, it seems highly unlikely that the objections – unless exceptionally sound, cogent and well founded – will be entertained.

The allegation of bias leveled against the JIT will need to be established through evidence. Burden of proof will be on the allegers, and not the JIT. As yet, no evidence has been brought forward or shown to the public, nor has it been claimed that there is any evidence kept for Supreme Court’s eyes only.

Objections pertaining to members of the JIT have already been dismissed by the Supreme Court. Thus; establishing that any one of the members was working on a hidden agenda may not be easy in the absence of strong, cogent evidence.


Q. 3 : Did the JIT go beyond its mandate?

To address this question, one first needs to understand the mandate given to JIT by the 5 member bench. It must be kept in mind that the bench did not restrict it’s self to prayers contained in the petitions. Instead the bench, on its own, devised thirteen key questions considered relevant and significant to conclusively and comprehensively adjudicate upon the matter before it. Mandate of the JIT was thus not governed by what was prayed for by the Petitioners, but by what was asked by the court. In that, the JIT doesn’t seem to have crossed any lines. The supreme court empowered the JIT to investigate into, and answer, the following main questions;

(1) How did Gulf Steel Mill come into being;

(2) What led to its sale;

(3) What happened to its liabilities;

(4) Where did its sale proceeds end up;

(5) How did they reach Jeddah, Qatar and the U.K.;

(6) Whether respondents No. 7 and 8 in view of their tender ages had the means in the early nineties to possess and purchase the flats;

(7) Whether sudden appearance of the letters of Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jaber Al-Thani is a myth or a reality;

(8) How bearer shares crystallized into the flats;

(9) Who, in fact, is the real and beneficial owner of M/s Nielsen Enterprises Limited and Nescoll Limited,

(10) How did Hill Metal Establishment come into existence;

(11) Where did the money for Flagship Investment Limited and other companies set up/taken over by respondent No. 8 come from, and

(12) Where did the Working Capital for such companies come from and

(13) Where do the huge sums running into millions gifted by respondent No. 7 to respondent No. 1 drop in from.

Additionally, two other questions/queries were also put forth;

(14) The JIT shall investigate the case and collect evidence, if any, showing that  respondent No. 1 or any of his dependents or benamidars owns, possesses or has acquired assets or any interest therein disproportionate to his known means of income.

(15) The JIT may also examine the evidence and material, if any, already available with the FIA and NAB relating to or having any nexus with the possession or acquisition of the aforesaid flats or any other assets or pecuniary resources and their origin.

As is evident, an all encompassing mandate was given to the JIT. It can even be said that, considering the enormity of its scope, it was almost impossible to go out of its ambit. Furthermore, the bench said that this needs a “thorough” investigation. Meaning thereby, that all matters even closely related to any of the above questions became relevant. No limits could be imposed with regard to how far back in time the JIT needed to go with its investigations or how it stretched its inquiry horizontally or vertically.

Again, to establish the allegation that the JIT went out of its mandate, it will need to be proven that any specific action or aspect of its inquiry was absolutely irrelevant to the 13 (+2) questions. Again; unlikely.


Q. 4 : Can the bench pass a final order regarding Respondent No. 1 (Prime Minister’s) disqualification, or will there be a trial first?

This question has recently been raised, even by certain glorified jurists and human rights activists. It has been said, that the JIT report’s status is that of a “police challan” and no final order can be passed without a proper trial. Thus all that the bench can do is refer the matter to another forum for a proper trial.

First, judgment of the five member bench was quite clear on assumption of jurisdiction under Article 184 (3) over the case. The only disagreement, as I see it, was with regard to the mode of exercising that jurisdiction; whether to pass an order or a declaration directly, or to first have a thorough investigation first and then pass an order.

It is interesting to note that there was a tinge of the allegedly buried “doctrine of necessity” in the judgment. Jurisdiction was acquired after holding, unanimously, that it is due to failure of state institutions responsible for checking and eradicating the evils of corruption, money laundering etc., that the Supreme Court is left with no other option but to assume jurisdiction over this matter. Same reasoning has been given for forming a JIT instead of trusting NAB with the investigation.

It needs to be kept in mind, that if the Supreme Court were to render it’s self powerless in the face of technicalities and obstacles, it may not have assumed jurisdiction in the first place. If the grounds for assuming jurisdiction were consistent failure and ineffectiveness of the legal system and machinery in place, the same system and machinery will not be resorted to after spending more than a year in this exercise. The Supreme Court has unfettered powers under Article 184(3) when it comes to matters of public importance. It has already assumed jurisdiction over this matter, deeming it a case of immense public importance and will see it through.

In my opinion, the court will decide upon the Prime Minister’s disqualification, be it for or against it, without any trial or further proceedings. The Prime Minister may be summoned for appearing on the next date of hearing, may be the 24th. Where-after his fate may be decided. It will also be decided whether reference shall be sent to NAB, and who all are to be arrayed as accused in such a reference. Further, fate of Chairman NAB, may also be decided before a reference is sent. As for allegations of falsification and forgery of documents against other respondents is concerned, same will not be decided by the special bench, and may instead be referred to a proper forum.


Q.5 Did the JIT have outside help? From the “establishment”, ISI in particular?


This is not a strictly legal question, however I would like to comment on it as follows. This question has been raised by several persons within and without the PMLN.

Even though professionals in the JIT were competent enough to investigate the matter and write a comprehensive report within 60 days, ready availability of certain documents and foreign assistance to it has raised a few eyebrows. I for one, do believe that the JIT was helped by the ISI. But was it an “outside” help?

One member each from the ISI and MI were inducted in the JIT upon Supreme Court’s directions. Reasons for doing so may vary from their institutional professionalism to resourcefulness, but the fact remains that they were officially a part of the JIT and thus all their resources were readily available to the JIT in the performance of its functions. So these are two different questions; erroneously or mala-fidely asked in conjunction. Yes the JIT was aided and helped by the ISI. No, that does not mean it had any “outside” help. The five member bench also directed all state institutions, and the respondents, to cooperate with and facilitate the JIT in the performance of its task. Thus, even if it weren’t a member of the JIT, ISI was duty bound to assist it.



Dr. Uzma’s “Honest” Revelations.


If you’ve missed “the most honest press conference ever” by Dr. Uzma, you can read it’s text here.

Dr. Uzma (PROUD Indian Citizen) talks about her ordeal;

“Let me begin by revealing that I am not Dr. Uzma. I am Cinderella White, with hints of James Bond and Sherlock Holmes. Actually I am a mix of several fictitious characters, but I am myself real. And so is my story, which is as real as a gold cucumber stuck on the horn of a Unicorn grazing on the lush pink grass of King’s Landing. Also I would like to say that I love Shushu Auntie, she’s the best and gives the best bribes—gifts..I mean gifts.

Now let’s begin with when I was hypnotized by Sauron and made to go to Pakistan. I did not know what I was doing. Planning my trip to booking and beginning it was all Sauron.

Tahir; my husband, was actually an Orc. He forced me to marry him and recorded our marriage on video where no sign of coercion is evident because he forced me to act natural during our wedding and also forced me to act as if I was wide awake while I was actually heavily sedated. He took me to Buner. This was not a trip willingly made, it was a kidnapping. I was tortured physically and emotionally and kept in captivity while occasionally being released to roam around in the streets of Buner to gather knowledge about Buner; how many girls were there, their nationalities and their ordeals. I was also given internet access to google Buner and discover when the Taliban were in control and when an operation was conducted by the Pakistani Military to oust Taliban. I also visited all the houses in Buner – while in captivity – and discovered that everyone had two wives. While in captivity, I also surveyed the area and discovered, from several interviews, that most people from Buner live in Malaysia. How did I do all of this while being a captive and suffering inhuman torture? Well the answer to that my friends is that, as I told you, I am part Sherlock and also part Bond.

I will not give any explanation as to how I managed to get to the Indian High Commission, or how I managed to make my captor accompany me, because apparently the writer has left that part vague and unattended. But what the heck, there is a thing called improvisation in this industry. So let’s just say one night while I was sleeping on a bed of thorns on the top of a hill in the dungeon where I was kept, while 60 foot crocs swam in the pond below, Shushu Auntie appeared in my dream. Only it wasn’t really a dream. She asked me to gather a watermelon, a rat, a pumpkin and a frog. So I did, and she waved her wand and behold there stood before me a chariot that I rode to the Indian High Commission. Remember how I was hypnotized by Sauron? Well I used my superhuman skills to learn hypnosis while being hypnotized and then hypnotized my captor/husband to accompany me to the Indian High Commission. It was surprising that people at the High Commission instantly believed me, may be because back then I actually used to tell the truth. I had nothing when I came to the Indian High Commission *sad face*, and now I have so much doe *giggles*, all legitimate hard earned money, no bribes or anything *serious face*. Anyways, they then took me in, and I stayed there for the rest of my days in Pakistan. That’s when they came up with this ridiculous story and we decided to try and tarnish Pakistan’s image through this opportunity that presented itself in the shape of a Cinderella cum Bond cum Holmes in front of you. All thanks to Shushu Auntie.

People claiming that it was Pakistan’s judiciary, Islamabad High Court in particular, that helped me get back to India are lying. It’s the IHC which passed the orders for my safe return, and everyone knows that IHC stands for Indian High Commission, so thank you Shush Auntie…you are shoo shweet.

It is very easy to go to Pakistan; you just apply for a visa and they themselves come and pick you up. But coming back from Pakistan is impossible. As you all know, the reason for Pakistan’s large population is the fact that 99% of the people who travel to Pakistan are forced to stay there. Pakistan’s own population is actually just 100 million. The rest are poor visitors who went there and could never return. I would also like to point out here that many girls who went to Pakistan after arranged marriages, are all miserable and crying. I know this because I had the opportunity to meet all of them while I was in captivity in Pakistan. I also saw that In each home in Pakistan, there are 2 to four wives.

Finally let me tell you conclusively – backed with sound, logical and irrefutable reasoning – that Pakistan mei aadmi bhi safe nahi hain. Waiting for the sound, logical and irrefutable reasoning? Well prepare yourselves because here it comes: I know that even men aren’t safe in Pakistan because….*drum roll*…..jis tareekay se humari koi baat hoti thi to buhut problem hoti thi har aik cheez mein. eh? eh? Is that the most specific, definitive, cogent and rational argument you have ever heard or what?

In the end I would like to tell all of you that Pakistan is bad. It is a boo boo place, real yuckie. Not like my India. India is a wonderful place, especially for the women (being raped) and minorities (being lynched and forced to convert and not eat beef). I love India, I love Shushu Auntie, I love the officers at the High Commission and the Indian Currency. Oh I love the Indian rupee, each and every one that I have received for going along with this ridiculously unbelievable story that these people came up with apparently with zero effort. I mean they could have employed a good writer from bollywood to write the script for me and I could have looked a little less absurd and phony, but no! it had to be someone Shushu auntie trusted, even if he was a retard with no writing skills or imagination.

Ok that’s about it.

Thank you!

Oh and tears…I forgot tears. So yes, tears and ummm a sad face.

Thank you.”

Criminals in our Inbox

Door to door marketing is not that common in Pakistan for a number of reasons. Even in other countries, technological developments in marketing and advertising have rendered door to door marketing redundant and marketing reps are extinct in most fields with only a few exceptions. But imagine it weren’t so. Imagine if door to door marketing was an often used advertising and marketing strategy employed by businesses in Pakistan. Now imagine if there were no rules or regulations in force to govern and regulate the use of door to door marketing strategies. Twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, any hour of the day any Tom, Dick or Harry – or Tina, Diana or Harriet – could come knocking on your door, or ringing your door bell, to introduce you to his/her company’s product or services.

Whenever there was a knock on the door and you had to walk all the way out, there was no way of knowing if it’s your mother, a friend, an invited visitor or just another uninvited, unsolicited walking talking advertisement to waste your time and energy. At first you may be ok with it; two or three reps visiting your abode to tell you about their interesting, cheap and useful products. But when the frequency reaches 20 to 30 per day, and most or all of the visits relate to products or services that have no utility for you, it can and most certainly will become a nuisance that you will want to stop. You may stop answering the knocks and bells and come up with a way to know when it is someone you were expecting like having them call you instead of knocking. Thankfully, this is just a hypothetical problem, or is it?

When I woke up this morning, I had one hundred and seventy three unread messages on my cell phone. I stopped checking and reading my messages a couple of days ago. I don’t even have the time to go through my messages and delete 20 to 30 useless spam messages every-day. I am a professional lawyer, and sometimes important messages from clients do get buried under the bulk of these unsolicited, useless spam messages. I don’t buy women’s clothing and I don’t wear them either, yet I have a number of messages from boutiques telling me which lawn print is in and which boutique is offering a sale. I don’t yet need tuitions for my children but every day I am told which academy offers what kinds of tuitions. I am happy with my caller tune; the conventional “toon toon”, and I don’t want Naseebo Lal, or Arijit Singh singing to whoever tries to call me, yet I have several messages offering different kinds of songs that my callers can hear while they wait for me to answer.

I am sure I am not the only one aboard this annoying, irritating, absolute nuisance of a ship. Every unfortunate soul who owns a cell-phone gets bombarded with a bulk of spam messages every day. Our numbers are obtained from our service providers by these businesses, or spam message senders hired by these businesses, and then the torture begins. Messages from family, friends, clients and acquaintances go unseen just because we are now used to our message tone beeping every five minutes and are 90 % certain that it’s just another spam message.

Well the good news is, and it may come as a surprise to many, that this is absolutely illegal. Most of us have heard of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act of 2016, but for the wrong reasons I am afraid. Section 25 of the Act makes it illegal to send unsolicited marketing or advertising messages to recipients, especially without providing the recipient an option to unsubscribe from such marketing.  Violation of this section entails a fine for the sender which ranges from Rs. 50,000 to One Million. All you need to do is lodge a complaint.

Section 25 is reproduced below, relevant parts, as applicable to above-mentioned subject, have been highlighted for clarity.

“25. Spamming.–{l) A person commits the offence of spamming, who with intent transmits harmful, fraudulent, misleading, illegal or unsolicited information to any person without permission of the recipient or who causes any information system to show any such information for wrongful gain.

(2) A person including an institution or an organization engaged in direct marketing shall provide the option to the recipient of direct marketing to unsubscribe from such marketing.

(3) Whoever commits the offence of spamming as described in sub section (l) by transmitting harmful, fraudulent, misleading or illegal information, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine of rupees fifty thousand which may extend upto rupees five million or with both.

(4) Whoever commits the offence of spamming as described in sub section (l) by transmitting unsolicited information, or engages in direct marketing in violation sub-section (2), for the. first time, shall be punished with fine not exceeding fifty thousand rupees, and for every subsequent violation shall be punished with fine not less than fifty thousand rupees that may extend up to one million rupees.”

The evil of spamming is relatively recent, prevalent since a few years after the advent of internet and cell phone technology. Even though it has only recently been declared illegal by way of an enactment in Pakistan, same has been illegal in other jurisdictions for years now. In the United States of America, the Can-Spam Act was enacted in 2003. Canada legislated its own anti spamming laws in 2010 and the UK has also declared spamming a criminal wrong. Our neighbor India, however, seems to have no such laws in place, especially since the repeal of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000.

There haven’t been many cases or considerable action for implementation of our own Section 25 for reasons that include apparent non-seriousness of the offence, lack of interest and most importantly; lack of awareness. A wrong that wasn’t even illegal a short while ago, is now a crime. Citizens now have a recourse for redress of their grievance against this nuisance, and a little pro-activity can help rid us of this cyber menace.

The Quetta Inquiry Commission Report; another wake-up call.

Residents light candles for lawyers killed during the Monday blast at Civil Hospital during a candle light vigil in Quetta, Pakistan August 9, 2016. REUTERS/Naseer Ahmed TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

The 8th of August, 2016 came with a devastating tragedy for the people of Balochistan, especially for the lawyers’ community therein. President of the Balochistan Bar Association, Mr. Bilal Anwar Kasi, was murdered not far from his home in Quetta. The murder, as it turned out, was only the first of two terrorist attacks. Mr. Kasi was killed to lure citizens to the hospital where another tragedy struck. A suicide bomber detonated his vest amidst a congregation of lawyers gathered for their departed friend and colleague. 75 perished, 105 were injured; most of them lawyers. The tragedy that befell Quetta that day did not just claim ordinary lives; it took many of Balochistan’s thinkers, educated elite and fine legal minds. It may suffice to be deemed a tragedy for the people of Balochistan and Pakistan, but for the victims’ families and the legal fraternity, it was nothing short of a calamity of catastrophic proportions.

As after any terrorist attack – that unfortunate Pakistanis are not unfamiliar with – condolences were sent, solidarity was expressed, resolves were made and soon, life went on just the same. But then the Supreme Court of Pakistan took a Suo Moto notice of the August 8th attacks and vide order dated October 6th, 2016, nominated Justice Qazi Faez Isa as a single member commission to inquire and “look into from all the relevant aspects of this mutli dimensional tragedy”. A little over two months later, on December 13th, Honourable Justice Qazi Faez Isa submitted his report; “The Quetta Inquiry Commission Report”, in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Some dubbed this report a “charge sheet” against the federal and provincial governments and, particularly, against the Federal Interior Minister. But let’s give political point-scoring and blame game a rest. We have lost enough lives, shed enough blood and seen enough death to merit coming out of our selfish, shortsighted and shallow shells. The report has been attacked and defended at several forums but unfortunately its gravity seems to have gone unnoticed by both who agree and disagree with its findings. It is not a charge-sheet against any government or individual. It is a wake-up call for everyone; all political parties, all law enforcement agencies, every parliamentarian, policy maker, each and every one of Pakistan’s citizens. Sadly, our usual response to such wake-up calls is hitting the “snooze” and going back to sleep.

Justice Isa has done this nation a great service and his report merits serious consideration as opposed to being shelved in some record room only to be used as a reference for someone’s dissertation or in some case twenty years from now. It deserves a status higher than that of a “hot topic” discussed in talk shows for a few days and consequently pushed back by some newer, hotter news. It has to be, needs to be discussed, debated and deliberated upon in the Parliament, as soon as the Parliament gets its own status back. The follies and flaws identified in this report need to be addressed, questions need to be asked, answers so desperately need to be sought. The report calls for governmental and institutional introspection.

Last year the General Elections Inquiry Commission conducted a complex exercise and submitted its report. It was an elaborate commentary on the flaws of our electoral system and recommended solutions and reforms for improvement. The report was met with applause by the relieved and criticism by the disappointed, discussed and analyzed and then discussed some more. Though nothing good has come out of it yet, since the consequent electoral reforms remain in limbo till date.

Justice Isa’s report is equally, if not more, significant. It is an elaborate commentary on all that is wrong with Pakistan’s anti terrorism stand. The report covers several aspects of our strategy to counter this vile affliction. It exposes loop holes that remain even after having been pointed out time and again. Despite having lost more than 60,000 lives and incurring financial losses worth trillions, there are faults and flaws in both the policy and its implementation. Confusion persists at the top level regarding jurisdictions and Federal departments seem unclear on their domain. Punjab seems to be the only province to have established an advanced forensics laboratory. Proscription of organizations that facilitate, promote or endorse terrorists and terrorism is delayed in some cases and rendered ineffective in others. Nepotism seems to be an established norm for appointments to critical posts and positions, which results in criminal incompetence that facilitates law-breaking and, in some cases, terrorism. All these observations, along-with several other vital findings have been made in Justice Isa’s report. The Commission seems to have brilliantly used the 8th August attack as a sample to study and diagnose the ailment as well as prescribe an efficient treatment plan. Illegal appointments, callousness of government functionaries, institutional incompetence, unchecked and flagrant violations of rules and laws, irresponsible handling of terrorism related news by the media, power politics among law enforcement agencies with overlapping spheres, brazen misuse of public funds, absence and mismanagement of resources, maladministration, messed up priorities and politics over the dead and devastated, have all contributed to where we stand today.

There is no institution solely responsible, no political party liable alone; each government, every official and all political parties who have held the reigns of this country or a relevant department since the ongoing spree of terrorism started in 2001/2002, are responsible for the shortcomings that have paved the way for further terrorist attacks. One can only hope that those in positions of power today, policy makers and the officials responsible for its implementation, will rise up to the challenge and do their best to curb this menace that has already taken too many of our own from us.

But first,  have you; our policy makers, legislators and political party leaders, actually read Justice Isa’s report? I have an answer to that question based on my limited understanding of our political, legal and executive system, and I so desperately want to be wrong. It cannot be denied that terrorism in Pakistan has lost ground in recent past owing to some very effective measures at the State level. Loop-holes, however, remain and are capable of enabling the monster to bounce back. If these shortcomings, as pointed out in Justice Isa’s report, are ignored, the responsibility for any re-lapse and consequent damage would rest on all our shoulders more than the terrorists.

May Allah guide us, protect and save us from terrorism and terrorists, and from our ignorance and complacency before that. Amen!



Raisani’s Plea Bargain; Justice neither DONE, nor SEEN to be done.


“It is not merely of some importance, but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”

                                                                                                Lord Chief Justice Hewart.


Above quoted is a very famous, oft repeated, statement of Lord Chief Justice Hewart made in R vs. Sussex, Ex party McCarthy in 1924. The statement is very frequently repeated by Judges in all jurisdictions of the world. In Pakistan too, it is often repeated in verbatim, yet rarely seen to hold any force.  

On Wednesday, the 21st of December, 2016 however, the fortunate country of Pakistan did see justice being done when a corrupt public official faced the ultimate retribution for his crimes. Mr. Mushtaq Raisani, Ex-Secretary Finance, Government of Balochistan was apprehended by National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on  the 6th of May, 2016. A huge stash of cash was recovered from his residence. After keeping him in custody and investigating the case for over 7 months, NAB has managed to make an example out of Mr. Raisani.

Mr. Raisani will face a three tiered penal action;

  1. First, he will have to pay an amount of around 2 Billion rupees which is approximately 5 percent of his estimated wealth accumulated through illegal means (Rs. 40 Billion an estimate given by NAB). Now this poor man will have to live the rest of his life on a scanty wealth of just 38 billion rupees. Probably below (an imaginary) poverty line. His future generation will suffer the consequences of Raisani’s actions. What if he, or his children, wanted to buy a country? Raisani’s dream of spending 40 billion rupees has been shattered, thanks to the exemplary reprimand meted out to him by our legal system.

The soft hearted lot of you must be thinking the above punishment is more than enough. Hold your breath, for there is more. Sometimes you have to be harsh in actions against criminals so as to create a deterrent.

  1. In addition to giving up 5 percent of his wealth, Mr. Raisani will also be -*drum roll*- disqualified from seeking a public office. Yes, his days of being a government servant are over. No official vehicle, no office with Jinnah’s picture on the wall, no salary or free travelling.

And as if this wasn’t enough, there’s more still.

  1. The last tier of this magnificent retribution; Mr. Raisani cannot apply for, or obtain a loan from a bank. You can’t miss the beauty of adding this provision into his “sentence”. In case Raisani planned on realizing his dream of spending 40 billion rupees by obtaining a loan for 2 billion, it ends here. Take that you criminal, vile, corrupt person; no loans for you. Some may think Raisani is in a position to give loans, and not obtain them, but that’s not how NAB sees him. The inability to obtain loans will haunt him for the rest of his life spent in any country of his choosing, in his mansion or villa with toilets made of gold.

Where is the deterrent you wonder? Well the corrupt have been sent a clear message; when being corrupt, go all the way, don’t hold back. Forget thousands and millions, go for billions and we guarantee you a safe journey and exit.

“Justice should not only be not done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be not done”.

The severity of his punishment so justly matches the gravity of his crimes. The money that he embezzled could only have been used to make hospitals in Balochistan. Thousands of lives could have been saved, but weren’t because this guy “needed” money. Millions of children could have been educated. Better equipment and resources could have been obtained for law enforcement agencies. Orphaned children, poor citizens, homeless, unfed could have been looked after with substantial welfare projects, but Mr. Raisani had better use of the money.

Balochistan suffers for a million causes, and Mr. Raisani appears to be a significant one of them. And thus he faced the wrath of justice. Praise be to NAB, praise be to the visionary leaders and legislators who provided for glorious retributions like plea bargain and praise be to all who came after them and agree with their rationale.

”Indeed, those who devour the property of orphans unjustly are only consuming into their bellies fire. And they will be burned in a Blaze.”

(chapter 4 , verse 10 , Quran )

”And do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly or send it [in bribery] to the rulers in order that [they might aid] you [to] consume a portion of the wealth of the people in sin, while you know [it is unlawful]’

( chapter 2 , verse 188 , Quran )   



NAB did not make the NAB ordinance that provides for plea bargain, NAB ordinance governs NAB.

Raisani is by no means an isolated case, there are hundreds, if not thousands like him. Many roaming freely – some in positions of influence – for reasons other than plea bargain. There are then the millions who are Mushtaq Raisani at a much smaller scale, yet equally vile and corrupt; opportunity being the only difference between them and the big fish.

If the law and leaders fail to control corruption, instead seem to encourage it, what recourse does the common man have?  

PTI’s Thanksgiving

On the 1st of November, Chairman Pakistan Tehrik e Insaf  (PTI) announced that his party would celebrate thanksgiving on the 2nd of November; a date previously set for locking down the country’s capital in protest against the Prime Minister and his family’s alleged corruption. Unlike several other parts of the world this particular thanksgiving is not for a good harvest, to be honest I am not so sure what PTI and its Chairman is thankful for and to whom exactly.

It seemed, from his short speech, that Khan was thankful to the Supreme Court for taking notice of the Panama Leaks and seeking reply from several respondents including the Prime Minister and his family. If this was the case, PTI could have celebrated thanksgiving on the 21st of October; a day after the Supreme Court had taken notice of the Panama Leaks issue and sent notices to all concerned parties. The Supreme Court, on the 1st of November, only allowed more time for submitting replies that it had actually sought on the 20th of October. So why did Imran Khan wait for his workers to be scared, arrested, harassed, refused entry in to Punjab, get injured, gather in open fields surrounding his residence in Bani Gala and have a cat and mouse play-date with the police, before announcing thanksgiving and calling off the lockdown?

So probably it was not the notices. Maybe Khan was thankful to the Supreme Court for forming a Judicial Commission to probe into the allegations of corruption brought to light by the Panama Leaks. But the thing is no such commission has been formed. Supreme Court, in its order dated 1st November, has only hinted at the possibility of forming said commission. Is PTI going to celebrate thanksgiving for a hint then?

There is one other possibility; that PTI ‘s Chairman and leadership is actually thankful for being given an opportunity to save face; not a very solid and convincing one, but a reason to call of the lock-down. Due to the government’s stern handed policy to deal with probable protestors, PTI’s workers did not turn up in numbers expected and necessary to lock-down the capital. The attempt to come out on the streets of Islamabad, or to leave Bani Gala for that matter, may have been thwarted successfully causing grave embarrassment and phenomenally weakening the party’s assertiveness. If this is the real reason behind the conversion of a lock-down into thanksgiving, then the blame lies partly with lack of political acumen of the leadership and partly with the failure of workers in responding to the leader’s call. The government arrested a few and managed to create a perception  that anyone who leaves for Bani Gala from any part of the country is at risk of being arrested, lathi charged and tear gassed. This perception made the PTI workers – most of whom are not familiar with the actual woes of a political struggle let alone a revolution – abstain from making an attempt to reach Islamabad.

I for one do not believe that locking Islamabad down was a prudent solution to the current predicament, but followers of Imran Khan and PTI did, and yet all it took to back down from their ‘revolutionary’ stance were a few arrests. The reason I do not agree with the politics of lockdown is that if this precedent is set, what would stop a religious party or an alliance of religious parties from locking down the capital – with a much larger number of devoted and violent followers coming not only to please their leaders but also Allah – for demands like the establishment of sharia, or a specific dress code for women? Any other entity, who is able to gather a crowd large enough, would be encouraged to apply similar tactics for any and all demands no matter how unreasonable, illegitimate or devastating. But insafians believed this was the only way, they believed that this is the moment of glory to make everything better in Pakistan, to sacrifice a few hours of freedom for the future generations. Yet, they did not leave the comfort of their homes for their leader, and thus lost a fight, and with it, all right to criticize the Party chairman for taking the alleged “u turn”.

PTI did, for a while at least, give a lot of people a lot of hope. Not just the insafians, but many from other parties or neutrals expected PTI to bring the long awaited “change” (tabdeeli). In days when PTI was gaining momentum and popularity, there was no knowing where it would end and what it could and would achieve. But thanks to clever and expert handling – most of the times inadvertently aided by PTI itself – and inability to learn from past mistakes, the hopes both from outside and inside the party are dieing. Scraping from the edges and working its way to the core, the party and its leadership seem to be ridding themselves of the popularity, fervor, vigor and ambitions they once held and promised.

The Struggle for Rule of Law(yers)


A few days ago Chief Justice (CJ) of the Lahore High Court (LHC) suspended the license of an advocate in accordance with section 54 of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act 1973 (LPBCA). Said suspension, and subsequent complaint to the Punjab Bar Council (PBC) was the result of an altercation between an additional sessions judge and an advocate, which was reported to LHC by the Sessions Judge. The lawyers community – a portion thereof – protested against this “illegal” act of the CJ LHC and has now demanded his resignation.

This is truly a defining moment for the lawyers of Pakistan, who were only 9 years ago fighting, struggling and “sacrificing” their all for the independence of judiciary, just as political parties have “struggled” and “sacrificed” for democracy. If we don’t stand up for what is “right”, we will lose the fight, the battle and the war for (against) “rule of law” in Pakistan.

The lawyers – a portion thereof – demanded that the CJ LHC resign, the supervisory committee of the LHC be dissolved and Section 54 of the LPBCA be repealed thereby ridding the Supreme Court and High Courts of their power to suspend an advocate’s license. Why should the superior judiciary have any control over the conduct of lawyers? The Bar councils – composed of elected members who are indebted to the lawyers for their current offices and dependent upon them for any future office they may hope to be elected to – are sufficient to decide upon any matter relating to an advocate’s conduct. The members of a bar council have no reason to be biased or tilted in favor of any advocate regardless of his political weight. Does anyone doubt a bar council’s ability to act against an advocate even if he commands hundreds of votes and can make or break any bar’s election? This would be like doubting Trump’s sanity, Zardari’s integrity and Fazl ur Rehman’s feminism.

The honorable advocate had only innocently snatched a case file from an additional sessions judge to write upon it an order of his choosing. Was this unethical? Yes. Illegal? May be. Necessary? Of course. Who knows the law better than a lawyer? In fact once these demands are met, the next phase should begin; with new demands which should include; amending the Criminal Procedure and Civil Procedure Codes to empower advocates to decide their own cases. Once the CPC and CRPC have been duly amended, the lawyers – a portion thereof – should then struggle for the establishment of a lawyers supervisory committee to oversee conduct of the judges and to hear and decide complaints against them.

This is not just a fight for personal interests, vengeance or justice, this is a struggle for the Rule of Law(yers). The fight should go on till the last drop of our blood, the last shred of sanity and laying of the last brick in the tall tower of idiocy. Zinda hain wukla (The lawyers are alive), the law? not so much.