But this was not the reason for the outrage of people like Asma Jahangir, the primary reason for this outrage is the short order in this case. I have read numerous supreme court judgments and short orders, but none of them has been so shameful (including even the Dosso case (1958) judgement) as this one. This short order has put the whole judicial/constitutional achievements back to year 2000. All the good that was achieved by the November 3rd Judgement has been washed away by this short order.

The short order starts with mention of “Objective Resolution” (one of the most abused constitutional artifact by the military dictators) , the purpose of mentioning the Objective Resolution and the quoting the part that it “commands” is with malafide reasons to declare the “national security” as defined by the military establishment, above the fundamental rights of people of Pakistan. This short order will have very far reaching impact in the constitutional history of Pakistan, just like Dosso case had.
Besides the “Objective Resolution”, the short order mentions article 9, 14 and 19A. And in all three instances the short order stretches the definition of fundamental rights defined in these articles to absurd limits. Let me quote here all three articles here.

9. Security of person.
No person shall be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law.

14. Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.
(1) The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.
(2) No person shall be subjected to torture for the purpose of extracting evidence.

[19A. Right to information:
Every citizen shall have the right to have access to information in all matters of public importance subject to regulation and reasonable restrictions imposed by law.]

Now none of these articles are applicable in the actual case. The memo has not specifically taken the life of anybody in Pakistan, neither it has taken the liberty of any person.
No Aristotle can bring a logic that can explain the application of article 14 in this case.
Similarly the right to information has been stretched such absurd limits to ask for the conversation between the two entities of which one is even a foreign government.

1. President of Pakistan will order an independent
inquiry into the allegations that Pakistan harbored and
offered assistance to UBL and other senior Qaeda
operatives. The White House can suggest names of
independent investigators to populate the panel, along
the lines of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, for example.
2. The inquiry will be accountable and independent,
and result in findings of tangible value to the US
government and the American people that identify with
exacting detail those elements responsible for harboring
and aiding UBL inside and close to the inner ring of
influence in Pakistan’s Government (civilian, intelligence
directorates and military). It is certain that the UBL
Commission will result in immediate termination of active
service officers in the appropriate government offices and
agencies found responsible for complicity in assisting
UBL.
3. The new national security team will implement a
policy of either handing over those left in the leadership
of Al Qaeda or other affiliated terrorist groups who are
still on Pakistani soil, including Ayman Al Zawahiri,
Mullah Omar and Sirajuddin Haqqani, or giving US
military forces a “green light” to conduct the necessary
operations to capture or kill them on Pakistani soil. This
“carte blanche” guarantee is not without political risks,
but should demonstrate the new group’s commitment to
rooting out bad elements on our soil. This commitment
has the backing of the top echelon on the civilian side of
our house, and we will insure necessary collateral
support.
4. One of the great fears of the military-intelligence
establishment is that with your stealth capabilities to
enter and exit Pakistani airspace at will, Pakistan’s
nuclear assets are now legitimate targets. The new
national security team is prepared, with full backing of
the Pakistani government – initially civilian but
eventually all three power centers – to develop an
acceptable framework of discipline for the nuclear
program. This effort was begun under the previous
military regime, with acceptable results. We are prepared
to reactivate those ideas and build on them in a way that
brings Pakistan’s nuclear assets under a more verifiable,
transparent regime.
5. The new national security team will eliminate
Section S of the ISI charged with maintaining relations to
the Taliban, Haqqani network, etc. This will dramatically
improve relations with Afghanistan.
6. We are prepared to cooperate fully under the
new national security team’s guidance with the Indian
government on bringing all perpetrators of Pakistani
origin to account for the 2008 Mumbai attacks, whether
outside government or inside any part of the government,
including its intelligence agencies. This includes handing
over those against whom sufficient evidence exists of
guilt to the Indian security services.

Chohdary Court on the other hand was restored through the collective efforts of people of Pakistan. The people like Asma Jahangir, Munir Malik, Aitzaz Ahsan, and the lion of Pakistan Ali Ahmed Kurd and hundreds of thousands of illiterate, poor and common people of Pakistan living in remote parts of the country struggled for getting rid of the worst dictator of 21st century General Pervez Musharraf. Hundreds of people of Pakistan were martyred during this struggle including Benazir Bhutto. The elections of 2008 ensured that the people of Pakistan are ruled by the liberal democrats who have fought against the military, mullah and judges for decades. The 2008 elections also meant the restoration of judiciary that was kicked out by the mad dictator. Chahdary himself and the judges like Ramday owed a lot to the people of Pakistan as their job was restored not due to their own merit but due to the struggle of People of Pakistan to get better a court than the Dogar court.

Chohdary Court has proved itself arguably the worst court in the history of Pakistan. From the shameful verdicts like Mukhtaran Mai Case, to the shameful acts of giving extension to fellow judge in returning the favor, this court has proved itself the most coward and spineless than any other previous supreme court. Shamefully putting the case of missing person on back burner, passing obliging remarks for Kayani and Pasha and even going to the extent of praising MQM for their co-operation (as if they provided IMC the burgers which he ate at the Karachi Airport while Karachi was burning).

There is nothing that stops Chohdary Court from taking the decisions that can help country in keeping on the right path. Some of those actions could be:

1. Asking both Kyani and Pash to resign and face the proceedings for helping the mad dictator on November 3rd.
2. Institute the criminal proceeding against the ISI and other agencies in missing person case.
3. Take up the memo case and ask government to investigate if Army at any point  planned any coup against the democratically elected government.
4. Take up the cases against the terrorists and ensure justice is done.

But I am sure Chohdary Court does not have the guts and courage to stand against the military might. My respected Kamran Shafi is wrong when he says that he solutes IMC for his courage to stand up against the mad dictator on 9th March. If it were not Kyani the then DG ISI supporting him, I am sure IMC would not have muster the courage to say the famous NO to the mad dictator. And I am looking for the lion Ali Ahmed Kurd, whose single roar can get the floor of Court Room Number 1, quite wet.

It is my pet theory that once a Pakistani earns the trust of the people and knows people are behind him, he/she can take on any force and any dictator, and once a person have earned people’s trust, he never betrays them , all of the above ZAB , BB, NS and AZ and even Junejo they looked into the eyes of dictators even if they had, at some early stage of their career, worked with dictators. But after the realization that the people of Pakistan are behind them they have become a different person once and forever.

IMC is the most unfortunate person in the history of Pakistan , he probably earned biggest trust in Pakistan’s political history, with that trust he could have easily made his name remembered as the greatest founding father of democratic Pakistan. After his restoration he could have easily brought Kyani / Pasha to the court, ensured that the missing people are recovered and Kyani/Pasha and his associates get exemplary punishments. There was no one who could have stopped him from making history after his restoration. From centre-right NS to PPP and from Swat to Baluchistan people would have supported him just as they supported when he was sitting in his home.

He forgot that the people power is bigger than the power of gun. The simple thing that all his fellow countrymen (ZAB, BB, NS) learnt easily. It was not difficult for him to make the history. All routes were open for him. In November 3rd case he could have easily brought both Kyani and Pasha and all their accomplice generals in the court, would have given them sentence under article 6, nobody could have stopped him.
In missing people case all ISI criminal could have easily been put in jails and given capital punishments in some instances. No one was there to stop him except of course the army, there is no question this time he might have ended up in adiala jail instead of his home but he could have easily become immortal after choosing that path. People have seen how ZAB, BB, NS took on the generals when they were in power, albeit they ended up in jails, gallows and out of country. IMC could have easily done the same but decided to squander the opportunity.

Instead he choose the path that was easier but led to anonymity in the history. After his restoration IMC turned out to be worse than Abdul Hameed Dogar in many ways. He decided to play to the gallery (a gallery where the generals were sitting in audience), he preferred “Fake Degree” case over the “Missing People” case, and NRO over “November 3rd” and “Firing” his fellow judges instead of “Firing” the generals.  He never looked to be a person of character in the absence of people like Aitzaz Ahsan/Munir Malik. His observations in the court even when they were rhetorical looked devoid of substance. He looked weaker than Hameed Dogar when he formed a 5-member bench for PCO judges case.  He looked sinister than Pervez Musharraf when passed judgments like NRO against the politicians. In short IMC is the story of disappointment to the people of Pakistan. He also proved to be an exception to my theory, it is not only the trust of people that makes a person powerful but also the character of that person to uphold that trust.

http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/Crl.P.163_to_171&S.M.C5_2005.pdf

I don’t intend to write here any rebuttal or post-mortem of this “judgment” as I think this “judgment” is worse than the decision of the punchayat who ordered the gang rap of Mukhtaran Mai. I however want to highlight some parts of this.
I will be using this analogy of judges daughter or my own daughter as I consider that Mukhtara Mai was also my daughter and of course there is no ill intention in using this analogy.
One “judge” establishes the Triple innocence of the accused.
Here is how does that .. as I said using the daughter’s example I hope in future no one quotes his “judgement” to establish the innocence of his “daughter’s” rapist.
1. First of all the “judge” abusing the the William Black Stone (sic.) maxim , want to quit ten “rapists” in order to save the one “innocent”. I must say that I would like to ask a simple question, if their daughter is raped by 10 persons, but there eleven persons present at the time of rape , would they acquit all ten in order to save the one innocent.
2. The “judge” disallowing the use of “rule of common intention” to the prosecution, declares that “they are not impressed that rule of common intention can be stretched to any person present at the time of alleged occurrence”.
Again if 15 person present on any eventful night, discuss about one’s daughter and then 10 of them rape the daughter, I would see how can “rule of common intention” be ignored in that case.
3. At another place in the “judgment” , the “judge” says that since there was only moon light in the room and there was no electricity in the village, how could Mukhtara Mai know how many people raped her and how can she name them. To be honest I feel extremely ashamed to used the analogy of “judges” daughter here… but the “judge” felt no shame in writing how can a lady tell how many people raped her in the darkness.

Besides, the village has no electricity, no PW has given the time of occurrence, but even if gathered by joining the scattered pieces of evidence, it was somewhere after midnight on 22.6.2002; the prosecutrix remained outside Khaliq’s house for a short while, so how could she in the darkness identify these eight persons by name and parentage.

After establishing the “triple” innocence of the rapists, the “judge” goes on to elaborate the “sanctity” , “virtue” and “respect” of the rapists family. Here is the paragraph read and ponder.

asking the prosecution version on its face value as correct, it does not appeal to reason that Salma’s brother, who alongwith two others when committed sodomy with Shakoor, was so naïve to understand that Shakoor would not disclose their misdeed to anyone, and on his unexpected refusal they took the extreme measure of confining him in his own house alongwith Salma; risking, endangering and putting at stake, the virtue, the sanctity and respect of a young unmarried sister. It is incomprehensible that his other family members including the mother, other brothers, sister would allow this nefarious design to be carried out and would all become a party with him to do away with sacredness of their innocent daughter. This is absolutely not done or conceivable in our rural society, where people are very sensitive about the chastity of their womenfolk, especially young and virgin.

Again I want you to ponder on bold sentences in above quote.
And now read this (as I said the more I read this “judgement” the more I get agitated. Look at the quote around the word ‘shame’ in the following , and how eager, excited and glad the “judge” is to continuously refer to “sodomy” and child not telling anyone…. Honestly I can tell that there is a vast majority of young children everyday being “sodomized” by the “judges”..err rapists and all of these children out of shame never tell this to anyone and they live in constant ‘shame’ for whole of their life. But the “judge” does not want to believe in it. )

It is unbelievable that the boy for ‘shame’ would not tell the true story, lose the chance of liberty and the sympathies when Maulvi Razzak alongwith the police had reached the spot for rescuing him, rather would go to the police station instead of securing his liberation and exoneration from the charge of rape. Strangely even in the police station did not reveal his sodomy to any one.

And now how could it be complete with the reference to “Molvi”… read this and ponder

is strange and incomprehensible that being an Imam of the mosque, a mature, responsible, educated person, he would act in a way, that without even verifying the occurrence from any authentic source; not from the immediate relations of the complainant side as to whether the story is true or otherwise or they would like for it to be announced in the mosque or not, he disclosed it in his juma speech, without even the permission of the complainant side.
Then the “judge” keeps on ridiculing the prosecution witnesses, he want’s to show his knowledge of Shakespeare too
To us, as put by Shakespeare, in Hamlet, the role of Maulvi Abdul Razzak (PW-11) is “like Hamlet without the Prince” (Hamlet).

…. I can’t just read this “judgment” , but please keep reading

PW-10 Shakoor stated, that when he reached home he discovered that Ziadati had been committed with his sister, it is then he disclosed the Ziadati was committed with him too. It is not plausible that neither at the police station, nor while coming alongwith PW-13, he mentioned about his Ziadati.

So the “judge” is surprised why young kid Shakoor did not tell “Ziadti” was committed with him too.

Read this and ponder more …

The absence of injures and marks on the body of a prosecutrix should not be the only factor to disbelieve her version in an ordinary rape case, but where a woman has been forcibly raped for full one hour, by four young individuals on the bare floor, it is not expected that she would not struggle and in the course would sustain no marks or injury. This, of course, is not a conclusive proof or disproof of rape and the learned High Court has rightly held it to be unusual; we have no reasons to differ with it.

Please note Aitzaz already argued about the non-presence of “marks” on body etc… I don’t need to quote them here… I want you to look at the language of above paragraph and see the wordings like “bare floor” and “four young individuals” , besides Shakespeare I think Nancy Friday was also under reading.
Reading the whole judgment you will find that how difficult it will be for women to prove her gang rap in future in Pakistan, she would have to ensure the following when rapist commit rape with her.
1. Have a well lit room, if there is no electricity than arrange generator. The darkness in the room may cast doubt on the presence of rapists in the room.
2. Ensure that she after the rape immediately go for a DNA and semen test to prove 4 or more person had intercourse with her, in order to prove that “gang” rape was committed she must bring the test report which shows that more than one person had intercourse with her.
3. Ensure that she had enough marks on her body even after few days of the incident to prove her struggle. if there are no marks then either only one person committed intercourse with her or she was not on “bare floor” or she did not “struggle”.
4. Ensure that she tells everybody in the village and better come on the tv channel (there are so many of them now) to announce she has been gang raped.
5. Ensure that while running out of the room after the rape , she remembers whether she was holding “shalwar” in her hand or forgot it in the room.
6. Finally all the “rapists” are innocent until proven “without a doubt” that each of them actually committed the intercourse. Hence if any one present at that time does not commit the intercourse , the victim should request them to do so. Otherwise benefit of doubt will be given to all the rapists.
7. It is important for the victim to understand that rapists belong to “respectable” family , they would not commit rape in their own home , therefore it will be in the benefit of the victim to “arrange” the rape in her own home. Otherwise keeping in account the “respectability” of the rapist’s family, benefit of doubt will be given to rapist.

To Mr. Pejamistri:

1. I really wish my mother was with the ISI; at least then our single-parent household would have one guaranteed source of income. Incase you didn’t know, her relations with the ISI have been very strained over the last few months particularly. The ISI did not even support her when the PPP government removed her from the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad. That is something for which I, let alone she, can never forgive them for.
2. Stating that my mom has put “mediamen’s lives in danger” is rather unfounded because she remains a significant contributor to the media. She was the editor of The Nation, appears regularly on television channels and talk shows, is the Media Spokesperson for Pakistan Tehreek-I-Insaaf and was a regular columnist for The News. I’d advise you to substantiate after writing, and if you can’t, don’t write.
3. WOAH. I have no hatred towards any religion. PLEASE refrain from grouping me with whoever you named. Do not EVER dare to make any sorts of assumptions regarding my religious “preferences” or opinions on other religions. I’m neither confused nor vengeful, as you would like to believe to comfort your pathetic self. Firstly, the “even if” argument I ran is a typical debater argument that we run to substantiate a line on two separate grounds, thereby, attributing it greater validity. Being a debater, that’s what I did, hence, not making me confused, but smart, unlike YOU. Secondly, saying the burqa has its origins in the Hindu Caste System isn’t a way of defaming Hinduism, unless you feel the burqa is an inherently horrible and atrocious symbol. Even then, that is your hateful view of Islam then, since you see it as an Islamic symbol, rather than my hateful view of Hinduism. Therefore, I’d advise you to clarify your own contradictions.
4. Lastly, don’t ever think you have the right to assume or make remarks regarding my character. Have a problem with what I write, go ahead and state that clearly. Don’t talk about who’s daughter I am, what my religious inclinations are or who my role models are. Have the decency to destroy arguments, like a normal human being, and not slander my character. I am Shireen Mazari’s daughter, and am proud to be. I’d like to see if your mother can achieve half as much as mine has. I am a moderate and do not believe in covering my own head, but until the day that the last drop of blood leaves my body, I will fight for the rights and freedoms of all individuals, particularly, my fellow Pakistanis. I have my own views, my own inclinations and my own beliefs, but that, in no way, allows you to judge who I am or make assumptions regarding my likes and dislikes. I don’t know who the hell you are or what you think of yourself, but I don’t tolerate this rubbish from anyone. If you can’t argue with a 17 year old girl like myself, don’t try and hide behind slander, just don’t try arguing. I’ve been through this since I was 14; people accusing me of being brain-washed and corrupted only because I could voice my opinions better than they did and only because I had a strong opinion. I’ve gotten to the point where I’ve learnt that this is only because you’re insecure of a teenage girl, which is sad, but also is a boost to my ego. So thank you for your inspiring comments.

Taj Haider is one of the very sane voices in the political sphere, his words are very thoughtful and actions are very commendable. Taj Haider was one of the front leaders in the movement against the mad dictator. CJ IMC could not muster the courage to issue contempt notice to Kyani and his cronies but he had the audacity to issue the contempt notice Taj Haider… shameful and disgusting!!!