Original Articles

Shahbaz Sharif was willing to remove CJP after restoration

Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz group which prides in being a principled party has been badly exposed in a new series of Pakistan exclusive Wikileaks release. Dawn and Wikileaks , have signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the exclusive first use in Pakistan of all the secret US diplomatic cables related to political and other developments in the country. The PML-N which claims to have stood with principled stance of restoration of Judiciary was was privately telling American diplomats that the future of the then-non-functional chief justice was up for negotiation.

In a March 14, 2009 meeting, “PML-N President Shahbaz Sharif welcomed efforts by the United States, United Kingdom, and the Pakistan Chief of Army Staff to negotiate a political settlement between the leadership of the PML-N and the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).  Shahbaz stated that the three parties working in concert should eventually be able to place sufficient pressure on both sides to find a durable solution to the crisis and that the Sharifs were satisfied that any deal guaranteed by the three would be implemented.”

According to the reporting officer, the now infamous Brian D. Hunt, “On the issue of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, Shahbaz claimed that the PML-N was open to negotiation, provided that Chaudhry was symbolically restored as Chief Justice of Pakistan.  Shahbaz stressed that his party could not afford the political humiliation of abandoning what had become a long-standing principle in favor of Chaudhry’s restoration.  At the same time, Shahbaz claimed to understand that Chaudhry was a problematic jurist, whose powers would need to be carefully curtailed.  Shahbaz underscored that the Sharifs were prepared to adopt any safeguards that President Zardari desired prior to Chaudhry’s restoration, including curtailment of his powers to create judicial benches, removal of his suo moto jurisdiction, and/or establishment of a constitutional court as a check on the Supreme Court.  Shahbaz also stated that following the restoration, the PML-N was prepared to end the issue and remove Chaudhry once and for all by adopting legislation proposed in the Charter of Democracy that would ban all judges who had taken an oath under a Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) from serving.”

So ladies and gentlemen, once again PML-N’s dubious role has been highlighted. Why I don’t say proved, because no one will confirm nor 100% deny that such things were ever uttered. The same cable also showed the inflexibility and hatred towards Shaheed Salmaan Taseer by Shahbaz Sharif.  In all this matter Shahbaz Sharif wanted Salmaan Taseer to be replaced.

The cables release should be good enough to expose the role of the PML-N which openly talks about “National Sovereignty” but then thanks the roles played by US and UK in an internal matter of the country. In November 2010, when Wikileaks started releasing cables, it was the PPP government, in general, and President Zardari, in particular, who were castigated as sell offs, and the bad people of Pakistan. PML-N tried to get as much mileage as possible from the Wikileaks, without realizing the information related to them which will eventually be released. Senator Pervaiz Rasheed has already termed the report of Brian D. Hunt as his “imagination”. Senator Sahib, imagination leads to creation. Doesn’t it?

We thank the Dawn Media Group for having honestly started the release of cables with the opposition party instead of beginning just with the government. This is what is called creating a level playing field.

The Text of the released cable is pasted below:

[Shahbaz was willing to negotiate CJ’s future]

196903            3/14/2009 11:25          09LAHORE49 Consulate Lahore         SECRET                      “O 141125Z MAR 09

FM AMCONSUL LAHORE
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3957
INFO AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE
AMCONSUL KARACHI IMMEDIATE
AMCONSUL PESHAWAR IMMEDIATE
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
CIA WASHDC
AMEMBASSY KABUL
AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
AMEMBASSY LONDON
JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC
SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL
AMCONSUL LAHORE  “S E C R E T LAHORE 000049

E.O. 12958: DECL:  3/14/2034

TAGS: PGOV, KDEM, PTER, PK

SUBJECT: SHARIFS REMAIN OPEN TO NEGOTIATION

CLASSIFIED BY: Bryan D. Hunt, Principal Officer, American

Consulate Lahore, Department of State. REASON: 1.4 (d)

1. (S) Summary:  In a March 14 meeting, Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) President Shahbaz Sharif told Principal Officer that he and his brother — former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif — welcomed efforts by the United States, United Kingdom, and the Pakistan Army to negotiate a political settlement between his party and the government.  Shahbaz stated that the Sharifs’ key demands in these negotiations were: (1) restoration of the electoral eligibility of both Sharif brothers; (2) restoration of Shahbaz Sharif’s government in the Punjab; (3) some sort of face-saving restoration of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry; and (4) agreement on transfers of powers between the President and the Prime Minister in accordance with the Charter of Democracy.  Shahbaz noted that the lawyers would need to be brought into the discussion on Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration and that, in his assessment, both current Chief Justice Dogar and Punjab Governor Salman Taseer would be unable to play a role in the new system.  Shahbaz rejected the proposal for a provincial unity government headed by the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), as contrary to the clear will of the electorate.  Shahbaz accepted Interior Minister Rehman Malik’s proposal to negotiate an appropriate venue for the lawyers’ planned sit-in in the Islamabad/Rawalpindi area, but stated that Advisor Malik would need to negotiate such a deal with the lawyers, not simply the PML-N.  As demonstrated in the meeting, the PML-N has hardened its demands and displayed little flexibility.  End Summary.

Negotiation

2. (S) PML-N President Shahbaz Sharif welcomed efforts by the United States, United Kingdom, and the Pakistan Chief of Army Staff to negotiate a political settlement between the leadership of the PML-N and the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).  Shahbaz stated that the three parties working in concert should eventually be able to place sufficient pressure on both sides to find a durable solution to the crisis and that the Sharifs were satisfied that any deal guaranteed by the three would be implemented.  Shahbaz stressed that he and his brother — former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif — were sincere in desiring a negotiated settlement to the outstanding issues and promised that they would show “”maximum flexibility”” in trying to find a workable approach in concert with international donors and the Pakistan army.  Shahbaz, however, assessed that it was President Zardari’s intransigence on restoration of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his misreading of Punjabi politics that had created the current crisis and that would likely be the greatest stumbling block to quick progress in the discussions.

3. (S) Shahbaz Sharif highlighted that the PML-N currently had four core goals in the negotiation process.  First, the restoration of the eligibility of both Sharif brothers to contest in national elections was a prerequisite to progress on any other issues.  Shahbaz bluntly stated that his party had no room for maneuver on this demand.  Second, Shahbaz insisted that his government in the Punjab province would have to be restored. Principal Officer raised the possibility of a provincial unity government headed by the minority PML, which Shahbaz rejected. The former Chief Minister argued that his party had a clear plurality in the provincial assembly, which had been established through an election that had been judged by the international community to be free, fair, and credible.  Shahbaz stated that this gave his party the mandate to form the government and that the public would never accept a deal that did not restore his government to power.  Shahbaz stressed that his party was not open to negotiation on this point.  Shahbaz underscored that Punjab Governor Salman Taseer would need to be replaced.

4. (S) On the issue of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, Shahbaz claimed that the PML-N was open to negotiation, provided that Chaudhry was symbolically restored as Chief Justice of Pakistan.  Shahbaz stressed that his party could not afford the political humiliation of abandoning what had become a long-standing principle in favor of Chaudhry’s restoration.  At the same time, Shahbaz claimed to understand that Chaudhry was a problematic jurist, whose powers would need to be carefully curtailed.  Shahbaz underscored that the Sharifs were prepared to adopt any safeguards that President Zardari desired prior to Chaudhry’s restoration, including curtailment of his powers to create judicial benches, removal of his suo moto jurisdiction, and/or establishment of a constitutional court as a check on the Supreme Court.  Shahbaz also stated that following the restoration, the PML-N was prepared to end the issue and remove Chaudhry once and for all by adopting legislation proposed in the Charter of Democracy that would ban all judges who had taken an oath under a Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) from serving.  Asked about the PML-N’s openness to a new role for current Chief Justice Hameed Dogar, Shahbaz stated that Dogar was a completely discredited jurist and that his party did not believe that he should play any role in a future set-up after his mandatory retirement on March 20.  Shahbaz left the clear impression that the PML-N was unwilling to show any flexibility on Dogar.

5. (S) Shahbaz raised that his party also believed any negotiated settlement should include movement towards full adoption of the Charter of Democracy, particularly its provisions related to the repeal of Musharraf’s controversial 17th amendment and the transfer of powers from the President to the Prime Minister.  Shahbaz stated that this had been a long-standing demand of the PML-N (although it had not previously been raised with the international community in the context of the current political crisis) and that given the problems Zardari had caused, it was prudent to move forward. Shahbaz indicated that the actual implementation of this part of the agreement could be prolonged, but felt that his party would require, at a minimum, a guarantee from Zardari that it would eventually move forward on an agreed-upon timeframe.

Long March

6. (S) Shahbaz noted that both he and Nawaz Sharif were very concerned about the potential for criminal and/or terrorist elements to exploit the chaos created by the long march and induce violence.  He thanked the Principal Officer for USG efforts to encourage former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to take greater precautions with his personal security, noting that Nawaz had understood the message and had promised to modify his behavior.  Shahbaz stated that he was disappointed that Interior Minister Rehman Malik had only belatedly advised the Sharifs formally of threats to their security in a March 13 letter.  He noted that even this had only come following the Sharifs’ independent gathering and sharing of information with the federal government on criminal elements’ intentions to make trouble during the long march.  Nonetheless, Shahbaz conceded that Malik’s fears were well-founded and promised that the senior leadership would take “”full-proof”” security precautions during the rallies and minimize their exposure to the public.

7. (S) Principal Officer asked Shahbaz whether his party was prepared to negotiate the venue for the planned Islamabad sit-in with the federal government in order to minimize the security threat and disruption to governance in the capital.  Shahbaz stated that “”unofficially”” the PML-N was fully prepared to discuss the issue with Malik and to compromise on a venue acceptable to both parties, even if it meant holding the sit-in in Rawalpindi or on the outskirts of Islamabad.  However, Shahbaz stated that the PML-N was not the primary organizer of the event and that if Malik wished to discuss such matters, he should include the other sit-in participants, principally the lawyers’ movement leadership in the negotiations.  Shahbaz was adamant that while the PML-N was prepared to be helpful, the party would have to follow the lawyers lead on this question, as the lawyers were the primary event organizers.  (Note: Ambassador conveyed Shahbaz’s message to Interior Minister Rehman Malik, who requested that the PML-N take the lead in organizing a trilateral discussion including himself and the lawyers.  Post has conveyed Malik’s request to Shahbaz Sharif. Shahbaz, after consulting with senior leadership of the PML-N, refused to assist.  End Note.)

Comment

8. (S) As was expected, the Sharifs are expanding the issues on which they want progress as part of negotiations with President Zardari.  The removal of Governor Taseer, the final retirement of Chief Justice Dogar, and progress on the Charter of Democracy provisions related to the 17th amendment are all new PML-N demands that will likely be highly controversial with President Zardari.  Post believes that the Sharifs are likely flexible on the 17th amendment but will hold firm to both the Dogar and Taseer removals — for largely personal reasons.  The offer to negotiate on the sit-in venue is an important concession that has the possibility to help improve security and minimize direct confrontation during the long-march and that could serve as a confidence building measure for future negotiations.  However, Shahbaz’s insistence on the lawyers’ involvement in this process could easily complicate the discussions significantly, and we will need to continue to lean on the Sharifs to show leadership and bring the lawyers to a reasonable compromise.

End Comment

Related Articles:

WikiLeaks: General Kayani wanted more US drone strikes in Pakistan

BaySharam Leagues (FCS, SLOP, PLM-N) and Wikileaks

About the author

Ahmed Iqbalabadi

9 Comments

Click here to post a comment
  • At the same time, Shahbaz claimed to understand that Chaudhry was a problematic jurist, whose powers would need to be carefully curtailed. Shahbaz underscored that the Sharifs were prepared to adopt any safeguards that President Zardari desired prior to Chaudhry’s restoration, including curtailment of his powers to create judicial benches, removal of his suo moto jurisdiction, and/or establishment of a constitutional court as a check on the Supreme Court.

    In many ways the credit should be given to Shahbaz Sharif and PML-N that they had the idea and feeling of IMC as “problematic jurist”. It also again strengthens my belief that both PPP & PML-N were absolutely right in using IMC and the judges issue to kick out the mad dictator , however it never meant that the IMC and his judges were actually not being controlled by Kiyani.
    I also think that both PPP and PML-N would have opted to restore and then restricted IMC to do what he is doing these days. It was actually Kyani and generals who ensured that IMC is restored and retained.

  • i think that pml-n has been aware of the CJ’s massive ego and his tendency to support the establishment at critical moments – most pml-n supporters i’ve talked to have been happy that CJ’s term will be over by the time their government comes to power. unfortunately for them, the role they’ve played in encouraging expansion of the judiciary’s power beyond its constitutional mandate is going to come back to haunt them – does anyone think that IMC’s successor will suddenly curtail the supreme court’s power or its aggressive attitude to the government. yeah right! good luck to them, dealing with the monster they’ve created.

  • @Rabia, question is if they ever get into government. It for sure is a monster that has been created to counter the PPP government. Will it ever get tamed? Yes it will.

  • There is still an important matter which has not been covered by wikileaks and that is BB’s murder. isn’t it surprising.

  • in 20 April leaks by Dawn.

    Nawaz sherif had agreement ( anchor person said) with Chaurdry Iftikhar and if he had won the 2008 election then he (nawaz) had plans to offer presidency to Chaurdry Iftikhar.

    now in my mind its confirmed that Love & forgive policy is on both sides nawaz and Chaurdry Iftikhar as when anchor person asked PML (n) spokeperson Siddiue ul Farooq he mentioned that Chaurdry Iftikhar has connections with nawaz since 1997.

  • صدر جي ٻن عهدن بابت لاهور هاءِ ڪورٽ جو فيصلو

    علي نواز چوهاڻ

    لاهور هاءِ ڪورٽ جو صدر جي ٻن عهدن بابت فيصلو مختلف اوڻائين سان ڀريل آهي جيڪي هن ريت آهن.
    (الف) هڪ سياسي پاليسي ڏني وئي آهي جيڪو پارليامينٽ جو حق آهي، جنهن وٽ آئين جي شق 47 تحت مواخذي جو اختيار آهي ۽اهائي صدر لاءِ ڪوڊ آف ڪنڊڪٽ ٺاهڻ جي مجاز آهي. عدليه ۽ جج پنهنجو ضابطه اخلاق پاڻ تيار ڪندا آهن.
    (ب) لاهور هاءِ ڪورٽ ان کان اڳ پاڪستان لائيرز فورم بخلاف فيڊريشن پي ايل ڊي 2004ع لاهور 130 ڪيس جي فيصلي ۾ مثال قائم ڪري چڪي آهي. جڏهن پٽيشن ۾ چيو ويو هو ته عدالت گائيڊ لائينز جاري ڪرڻ جو اختيار رکي ٿي ۽ صدر کي حڪومت جون واڳون سنڀالڻ کان نااهل قرار ڏئي ۽ قوم جي جمهوريت ڏانهن رهنمائي ڪئي وڃي. اها درخواست قبول نه ڪئي وئي ۽ رد ڪئي وئي. عدالت فيصلي ۾ لکيو ته پٽيشنز جي فصاحت ۽ بلاغت اسان کي نماڻو بڻائيندي خبردار به ڪيو آهي. عدالتون گذريل سالن ۾ ڪم نه ٿيڻ جي نقصان جو ازالو نه ٿيون ڪري سگهن ۽ نه ئي متوازن اوليتن کي هٿي وٺائڻ واري معاملي ۾ ڪجهه ڪري سگهن ٿيون. هي ڪيس ٻڌندڙ جج پاڻ کي افلاطون سمجھندي آئين کان مٿاهان نه ٿا ٿي سگهن ۽ نه ئي جذباتي ٿي پاڻ کي مونجھاري ۾ ڦاسائي سگهن ٿا. کين پنهنجي قانوني حدن اندر ئي رهڻو آهي.
    (ٻ) عدالتي معاون فيصلي سان مڪمل سهمت نه آهن.
    فيصلو اعلانيه آهي ۽ اميدن تي ٻڌل آهي ته صدر پاڻ کي پنهنجي سياسي عهدي کان ڌار ڪندو ۽ ايوان صدر کي پنهنجي پارٽي جي گڏجاڻين لاءِ استعمال نه ڪندو. عدالت فيصلي جو بنياد ميان محمد نواز شريف ڪيس پي ايل ڊي 1993ع ايس سي 568/443 کي بڻايو آهي، جيڪو فيصلو بلڪل مختلف حالتن ۾ ڏنو ويو هو. هن ۾ اخلاقيات کي بنياد بڻايو ويو جيڪو ڪو قانوني نڪتو نه آهي.آئين جي شق 43 (1) صدر کي سروسز آف پاڪستان ۾ ڪو به منافعي بخش عهدو يا ڪو ٻيو نفعو ڏيندڙ عهدو پاڻ وٽ رکڻ کان روڪي ٿي. ان ڏس ۾ سپريم ڪورٽ شاهد نبي ملڪ ۽ ٻيا بمقابلا چيف اليڪشن ڪمشنر ۽ ٻيا ڪيس پي ايل ڊي 1997ع ايس سي 32 ۾ منافعي بخش عهدو رکڻ جي الزام ۾ سينيٽر اسحاق ڊار جي نااهلي بابت فيصلي ۾ معيار مقرر ڪري چڪي آهي. بهرحال سپريم ڪورٽ ساڳي ريت صدر جي ڪوچيئرپرسن جي عهدي کي غير منافعي بخش هجڻ جي صورت ۾ صدر جي حق ۾ فيصلو ڏئي چڪي آهي. اهو چئي سگهجي ٿو ته ان سلسلي ۾ ڪو حقيقي ثبوت عدالت سامهون پيش نه ڪيو ويو آهي.
    آئين جي شق 42 صدر کي پارليامينٽ يا صوبائي اسيمبلي جو ميمبر هجڻ کان روڪي ٿي ۽ صدر وٽ اهڙو ڪو به عهدو نه هو. فيصلي ۾ آئين جي شق 43 (1) تحت نااهلي لاءِ ڪي مضبوط دليل ۽ ثبوت نه ملي سگهيا آهن. ڪيس ۾ التوٰ ۾ هجڻ دوران درخواست گذار پنهنجي درخواست تان هٿ کڻي چڪو هو. آئين جي شق 41 (1) جي لفظن ”unity of republic“ يا ملڪي اتحاد جو مطلب هتي جاگرافيائي طور اتحاد آهي. ان جو مطلب صدر جو غير سياسي هجڻ نه آهي. عدالتون اهڙن سوالن ۾ ڇو ٿيون ڦاسن: پروفيسر هاورڊ ميڪ ڪلوين پنهنجي ڪتاب The grout of political thought in the west ۾ لکيو آهي ته هر اهو ڪم جنهن جو اثر ٻين جي فلاح جي صورت ۾ نڪري اهو سياسي عمل هو. هن پنهنجين جذبن جو اظهار هيٺين لفطن ۾ ڪيو آهي.
    The state absorbed and included the entire collective activity of its citizens, a whole outside of which its members could not even be thought of much less exist. Hence all social life is political life….
    يعني رياست پنهنجي سڀني شهرين جي سمورين سرگرمين جي مجموعي جو نالو آهي. ايستائين جو ان کان ٻاهر ان جا شهري ڪجهه سوچين به نه. سڄي سماجي زندگي سياسي زندگي آهي.
    فيصلو هڪ سنجيده سياسي سوچ ۽ ملڪي سربراهه جي عهدي سان لاڳاپيل قبوليت جوڳي قانوني فلسفي کان وانجھيل آهي. فيصلو اڳوڻن مملڪتي سربراهن جي مثالن سا به ٽڪراءُ ۾ آهي جن وٽ وري ٻه ٻه عهدا هوندا هئا. عدالت آئيني حوالا ته ڏنا آهن پر ڪو به حوالو درج ناهي ڪيو جنهن مان ثابت ٿئي ٿو ته صدر جو غير سياسي هجڻ ضروري آهي. ترڪي جو مثال ڏنو ويو آهي پر ٻيهر آئيني حوالن ۾ ٽڪراءُ تي ڌيان ناهي ڏنو ويو. ترڪ صدر لاءِ آئين ۾ واضح طور لکيل آهي ته هو صدر جي آفيس ۾ اچڻ کان اڳ سياسي عهدو ڇڏي ڏيندو. هن ڪيس ۾ عدالت مدد لاءِ پڪاريندڙ هئي، جيئن يوناني دور ۾ تحريري آئين کان سواءِ ان جي دشمني تي ٻڌل هو ٻيو نظام به هو جنهن کي آئيني اخلاقيات جو نالو ويو. عدالت کي اڻ چٽا اصول ۽ ويراڳي فلسفين جي ڪجهه ٿيڻ گھرجي واري اصول نه پر 1973ع جي آئين تي هلندي قانون جي حڪمراني قائم ڪرڻ گھرجي ۽ هاڪاري سوچ رکڻ گهرجي.
    رياستي فلسفي ۾ افلاطوني نظريو آهي ته سياست هڪ فن آهي ۽ ٻين سمورن فنن جيان هن لاءِ به ماهراڻي معلومات جي ضرورت آهي. هو خوشحال هم گيريت واري پيريڪلين واري اصول جو مخالف آهي. حقيقت ۾ هي فيصلو صدر کان مطالبو ڪري رهيو آهي ته توهان شهري سوچ رکو، سماجي شخص بڻجو ۽ اهو پيريڪلين نظرئي تي هلڻ جو مطالبو ئي ته آهي. مسلمان اسڪالر ابو الريحان البيروني قدرتي قانون کي جھنگ جو قانون ٿو سمجھي، يقينن آئين کان سواءِ اهو ائين ئي هوندو. آئين ئي جھنگ جي قانون کي ختم ڪري مهذب معاشرو قائم ڪري ٿو، ان کي علمي بحث بڻائڻ بدران عمل ڪرڻ ۽ معاشري ۾ لاڳو ڪرڻ جي ضرورت آهي.
    صدر جو ڪردار هڪ مدبر جو هوندو آهي جيڪو پاڻ کي مستقل طور سياسي معاملن کان باخبر رکندو آهي. صدر هر سال پارليامينٽ جي گڏيل اجلاس کي خطاب ڪري حڪومت جي گذريل سال جي ڪاميابين کي اجاگر ڪندو آهي ۽ وڌيڪ رهنمائي فراهم ڪندو آهي. ان لاءِ کيس سياسي سرگرمين کان روڪڻ جي نه ته ڪا منطق آهي، نه اهو ممڪن آهي ۽ نه ئي اهو عوام جي ڀلي ۾ آهي. هن فيصلي جي نفاذ جي راهه ۾ رنڊڪون آهن ۽ سياسي تڪرار ۾ اضافي جو ئي سبب بڻجندو. آئين جي ڀڃڪڙي ڪرڻ تي صدر جي مواخذي جو آئين ۾ ڏنل اختيار ئي بهترين رستو آهي.
    آئون پنهنجي ڳالهه جج فيلڪس، جي فرينڪفرٽر ٽراپ بمقابله ڊيولز (1958) 3564586 فيصلي جي هنن لفظن سان ختم ڪندس. اهو آسان ناهي ته پاڻ کي پري رکي عقل کي هلڻ ڏنو وڃي ۽ هڪ شخص کي معاملا هلائڻ ڏنا وڃن. پر پاليسي جو اعلان ڪرڻ عدالت جو ڪم ناهي. اها ڳالهه اختيار محدود ڪريو ڇڏي ۽ عدالت کي پنهنجو اثر ٿاڦڻ کان به روڪي ٿي. اهو خود کي روڪڻ وارو اختيار ئي عدالتي حلف جو روح آهي. آئين ججن کي ڪانگريس ۾ انتظامي شاخ مٿان فيصلن ذريعي ويهڻ جي اجازت نه ٿو ڏئي.

    (ليکڪ دي هيگ ۾ گڏيل قومن جو جج رهيو آهي، لاهور هاءِ ڪورٽ جو جج به رهيو ۽ يونيسڪو اپيل (جڊيشل) بورڊ پيرس فرانس جو ڪو چيئرمين ۽ وزيٽنگ پروفيسر به رهيو آهي.)
    Chowhan2@hotmil.com

  • If the leak is true, then it is slightly encouraging that Shahbaz Sharif and PML-N seemed to be working well with President Zarari and considered Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry “problematic jurist” but, controllable….and that the judges weren’t controlled by General Kayani.

  • PPP will never tolerate injustice with students or teachers: Jahangir Badar

    LAHORE: The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) would never tolerate injustice with students or teachers and the Punjab government would have to review its policies in this regard, PPP Secretary General Senator Jahangir Badar said on Friday while protesting against police torture of students and teachers outside the Punjab Assembly.
    He made these remarks in a press conference at the Lahore Press Club. Badar said that using force could never achieve positive results and baton-charging innocent students and teachers made no sense adding that the Punjab government should not create such circumstances that force teachers to stage demonstrations.
    The PPP secretary general said that if required, the PPP might think about nationalising all educational institutions in the country’s best interest but no one would be allowed to mint money by exploiting students and teachers by privatising educational institutions.
    The former federal minister warned the nation that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N)-led Punjab government was pushing the country towards dictatorship. He said that the Punjab CM on behest of the capitalist and feudal groups attacked the educational rights of the poor and working classes and started privatising educational institutions against the commitments he had made with Benazir Bhutto during negotiations on political reconciliation.
    Badar disclosed that Shahbaz had made some commitments with Benazir in his presence on empowerment of the lower classes before returning to Pakistan but now he had taken a u-turn on the issue. He said that PML-N and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) leaders including Javed Hashmi, Ahsan Iqbal, Khawaja Saad Rafique and Liaqat Baloch had participated in student politics and urged them to gather on a common platform for showing solidarity with teachers and students against privatisation of educational institutions. The PPP senator expressing solidarity with teachers and students, who were tortured by police on the International Human Rights Day’s eve, urged lawyers and other people struggling for human rights in the country to come forward and support the cause of teachers and students. He claimed that only poor students won gold medals in examinations and they should not be deprived from their basic rights.
    Badar demanded the Punjab government to direct private-sector educational institutions to reduce their fees and all institutions failing to do so be nationalised with an immediate effect, as fees of these institutions was not in the common man’s reach due to inflation in Punjab. Responding to a question about Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani’s statement that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s nationalisation policy was outdated, the PPP leader said that Gilani was the PM of all allied political parties owing to which he had given a diplomatic statement on privatisation of educational institutions.
    He said that the PPP had not changed its policy on nationalisation of educational institutions for the poor people’s benefit. Badar said that the PPP always made the best decisions in every regime keeping in mind the present scenario and circumstances so it would not be justified saying that wrong decisions were made in past.
    Expressing some regrets on Shahbaz’s behaviour, he said that the Punjab CM had forgotten democracy’s way and started following dictatorial standards by using tyrannical methods against people who tried to get their constitutional and basic rights. Badar said that difference of opinion was democracy’s beauty and the PPP would try to convince the PML-N in a democratic way.