General's Justice

Let us read the Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan to find out if it really gives Gen. Musharraf power to do what he has shamelessly done Friday, by firing the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.

209 Supreme Judicial Council.

(1) There shall be a Supreme Judicial Council of Pakistan, in this Chapter referred to as the Council.

(2) The Council shall consist of,
(a) the Chief Justice of Pakistan;
(b) the two next most senior Judges of the Supreme Court; and
(c) the two most senior Chief Justices of High Courts.

(3) If at any time the Council is inquiring into the capacity or conduct of a Judge who is a member of the Council, or a member of the Council is absent or is unable to act due to illness or any other cause, then
(a) if such member is a Judge of the Supreme Court, the Judge of the Supreme Court who is next in seniority below the Judges referred to in paragraph (b) of clause (2), and
(b) if such member is the Chief Justice of a High Court; the Chief Justice of another High Court who is next in seniority amongst the Chief Justices of the remaining High Courts, shall act as a member of the Council in his place.

(4) If, upon any matter inquired into by the Council, there is a difference of opinion amongst its members, the opinion of the majority shall prevail, and the report of the Council to the President shall be expressed in terms of the view of the majority.

(5) If, on information [231A] [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court,
(a) may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or
(b) may have been guilty of misconduct,
the President shall direct the Council to [231B] [, or the Council may, on its own motion,] inquire into the matter.

(6) If, after inquiring into the matter, the Council reports to the President that it is of the opinion,
(a) that the Judge is incapable of performing the duties of his office or has been guilty of misconduct, and
(b) that he should be removed from office,
the President may remove the Judge from office.

(7) A Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court shall not be removed from office except as provided by this Article.

(8) The Council shall issue a code of conduct to be observed by Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts".

This is the complete text of Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan. It determines the composition, purpose and duties of the Supreme Judicial Council. Even a casual reading of this article leaves no doubt that accoding to clause (7) "A Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court shall not be removed from office except as provided by this Article".

Now, waht is the way to do it?

Clause 5 explains that, "on information from any source", either Council "on its own motion" may initiate an inquiry or the President shall direct the Council to intiate it, but it is the Council that determines if "a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court" has been found to be "incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason" of (i) "physical or mental incapacity" and/or (ii) was "guilty of misconduct" and Clause 6 says that after inquiring the Council reports its opinion to the President that the said judge is indeed, (a) "incapable of performing the duties of his office or has been guilty of misconduct", and (b) that he should be removed from office", then and only then "the President may remove the Judge".

But this is not what has happened. The Council has not initiated an inquiry. The President has not directed the Council to do so.

And this is what has actually happened!

1- The president receives "information" about Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Pakistan from his cronies, most recently from Naeem Bokhari;

2- The president does not direct the Council to "inquire into the matter";

3- Ignoring the Constitution the president "summons" the judge to his military residence and in presence of the prime minister confronts him with the information provided by Naeem Bokhari and force him to resign;

4- When the judge refuses to do so he is kept in the miltary residence of the president for hours;

5- He is "escorted" by the police to his residence but is not allowed to go to the court where he wants to go;

6- Police guard is appointed to detain his in his house and any person who wants to see him is stopped from doing so;

7- The president then asks the Council to inquire into the matter.

Now, cleary this is not what the Constitution says. But, then who the hell gives a f%&@ what the constitution says. It is the rule of jungle law.

Is this the kind of democracy Bush wants to promote all over the world starting with his "buddy"? Is there a coincidence that General has sacked the Chief Justice the same day America has opened military hearings at Guantánamo Bay in secret chambers?