What would be the criteria of Piety, Morality and Character if it is defined by Judiciary? For Example, growing Beard is part of Sunnah and most of the MNA/SENATORS/JUDGES dont have beard so who will decide about the Criteria of Piety since Quran and Sunnah is exploited by the Judiciary to condemn NRO. Moral Brigade in Judiciary should start following this in the light of Sunnah which they have exploited to condemn the NRO. As per Islamic Law "Growing Beard" is compulsory and SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THAT NRO BENCH and other Islamic Type Members of CIVIL SOCIETY are clean shave rather they have Moustaches and that too of a kind which is Unlawful in Islam [I mean moustaches beyond your upper lips]. Moral Brigade should define the “Absence of Beard” in the light of Quran and Sunnah from the faces of the Members of Judiciary in view of their own set standards in the decision against NRO.
As per Islamic Law "Growing Beard" is compulsory and Justice Javed Iqbal or even CJ and other Islamic Type of Judges are clean shave rather they have Moustaches and that too of a kind which is Unlawful in Islam [I mean moustaches beyond your upper lips].
The SCBA president said the judiciary should not act like trade unions, political parties and bar councils because such acts did not suit it. — File Photo
LAHORE: Supreme Court Bar Association President Asma Jahangir criticised on Tuesday a resolution unanimously passed at a full-court reference of the Supreme Court on Monday proposing an extension in service for Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday as an ad hoc judge for another year. Addressing a press conference, Ms Jahangir said the bar associations were showing resentment against the resolution. The SC judges had taken a political step by adopting a resolution for the appointment of ad hoc judges and the lawyers would also handle the issue politically, she added. The SCBA president said the judiciary should not act like trade unions, political parties and bar councils because such acts did not suit it. The judiciary was acting against its own decisions, she said. “The judiciary should do what it preaches.” She demanded of the government not to adopt the policy of leniency while appointing judges and said the resolution passed by a full court had no legal authority and it could not make the appointments. “But the judges should also think before taking such steps.”
Ms Jahangir said she herself avoided uttering words which could hurt the feelings of the judiciary, but in this matter one of the beneficiaries (judges) also attended the full-court reference, which did not suit the judges. She said ad hoc appointment of judges could only be made in case of an emergency or shortage of judges. The appointment of a judge on an ad hoc basis would tarnish the image of the judiciary. Ms Jahangir said the bar associations would resist the decision when it came to the judicial commission for approval. She said she respected Justice Ramday very much for his one or two good decisions, but he was often found humiliating senior lawyers and litigants. She suggested that additional judges should be confirmed and the SC judges should review their resolution passed for the appointment of ad hoc judges. The resolution also proposed the appointment of Justice (retd) Rehmat Husain Jafferi as an ad hoc judge, who had reached superannuation on Nov 22 last year.
Watch in the video below, Abbas Ather reveals without naming that it was a newspaper (Jang Group’s (Geo TV’s) newspaper The News) which had first spread a false rumour about the denotification of the Supreme Court judges on 19 January 2010. Try to search that news item via Google. And lo and behold. There is actually a news story in The News on that date. But there is a small problem here. The story has been removed from The News website; most probably very recently. No plan to withdraw judges’ restoration notification – 19 Jan 2010 … ISLAMABAD: There is no plan to withdraw the notification issued on March 17, 2009 for the restoration of deposed judges, including Chief …