Ejaz Asi - Information Designer from Karachi, Pakistan

BBC reports:

Several thousand of Mr Chaudhry’s supporters were with him, some chanting “Go, Musharraf, go”. The former chief justice had been surrounded by supporters on the 5km journey from his home to the court, and took more than two hours to get there.

The president is accused of trying to stifle the independence of the judiciary in an election year, and protests over the judge have snowballed into a campaign against the government.

Observers have said Mr Chaudhry is offering an alternative to Pakistan’s military rule, with an independent judiciary and a return to civilian government.

Reuters India isn’t silent on the worsening condition of Musharraf’s grip over power:
As Musharraf has come under fire for this perceived attack on the independence of the judiciary, his political allies have shown themselves unable to protect him.

Cracks are showing in the ruling Pakistan Muslim League, a party cobbled together after Musharraf’s 1999 coup, while its coalition partner, the Muttahida Quami Movement, is tainted by involvement in the Karachi violence.

The remaining pillars of support for Musharraf come from the army and the United States. Any sign of either of those creaking could be decisive.

Musharraf has looked flustered during television appearances in recent days and the tension among ordinary Pakistanis is palpable, particularly after the bloodbath in Karachi.

Herald Tribune reports in Pakistan’s suspended chief justice makes veiled criticism of military president on live TV:

About 8,000 jubilant lawyers and supporters from opposition parties gathered outside the court building, chanting slogans against Musharraf.

A clash between Chaudhry supporters and a government party killed 41 people in the southern city of Karachi two weeks ago. The violence generated sharp criticism of Musharraf at home and abroad amid claims that his supporters instigated the clashes with the apparent tacit support of security forces, which stood by without intervening.

Even CNN speaks out:

Pakistan’s suspended Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry warned against centralized power in a thinly disguised criticism of President Pervez Musharraf, without ever mentioning him by name.

Musharraf appointed Chaudhry to the court in 2005, but the judge fell from favor after exercising independence from the government in a number of cases involving the disappearance of terrorist suspects and human rights activists.

Guardian also notes on the same lines:

Musharraf plans to seek another five-year term as president this fall. Political parties who have been sidelined since he seized power in a 1999 coup say the president wanted to get rid of the independent-minded judge in anticipation of legal challenges to his intention of seeking the new term while remaining head of the army. The government denies the move was politically motivated and says the judge had abused his office.

Boston Globe has a piece of advice (finally) for President Bush:

Musharraf has provoked anger in several quarters: from lawyers appalled at his suspension of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry; from tribal members in Baluchistan furious at the army’s killing of a revered leader; from some tribal leaders who resent a regional warlord who killed hundreds of pro-Taliban Uzbek militants with backing from the Pakistani military; and from moderate Muslims who worry that nothing has been done to punish Islamist radicals who recently kidnapped an alleged brothel owner and destroyed music and video stores in Islamabad.

But these are matters for Pakistanis to decide, without lectures from an (US) administration that has been no more competent at promoting democratic change abroad than at coping with the aftermath of a hurricane.

Now, NDTV (along with many other news sources) report that:
According to a new biography of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz failed to charm her despite desperate attempts.

The book says that during her visit to Pakistan in March 2005, Aziz tried ”this savile row suited gigolo kind of charm, staring into Rice’s eyes”.

However, Rice stared him down and by the end of the meeting he was ”babbling” and shifting ”uncomfortably”.

According to the biography, Aziz bragged to Western diplomats that he could conquer any woman in two minutes, but failed miserably with Rice.

Brisbane Times from Australian continent also agrees:
“When Rice sat down with Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who fancied himself as a ladies’ man, Aziz puffed himself up and held forth in what he obviously thought was his seductive baritone. He bragged - to Western diplomats, no less - that he could conquer any woman in two minutes.”

Mr Aziz, who is married with three children, was out of luck

“There was this test of wills where he was trying to use all his charms on her as a woman, and she just basically stared him down,” the newspaper quotes Mabry, a senior correspondent with Newsweek, as writing.

“By the end of the meeting he was babbling. The Pakistanis were shifting uncomfortably. And his voice visibly changed.”

Permalink 1 Comment

It was a great weekend to boot with wonderful speeches at the seminar on Independence of Judiciary and Distribution of Power which was held at Supreme Court of Pakistan. Interestingly Chief Justice of Pakistan was also invited and yet again it was a huge scene of countless lawyers, workers from political parties and ordinary citizens who gathered at the Supreme Court Auditorium to listen to the Chief Justice who defied an Army General. Yet, in my opinion the real stars of the show were Barrister Aitazaz Ahsan and Justice Muneer A Malik whose sensational and idealistic speeches were remarkable. I don’t quite seem to like or develop an appreciation for CJP Iftikhar’s speech style. Well, that would be very personal preference and doesn’t discredit his role, status or his stance in anyway.

Aitzaz Ahsan condemned the past judges’ acceptance and adaptibility to “Doctrine of Necessity” which was invented to safeguard the interests (and skins) of then judges who had to accept any or all military rulers and their decisions in the history of Pakistan. It’s such an irony that the same military regimes who come marching in on the premise of bad governance of civil political parties and yet the very same military regimes, after having ruled the country for such long years, left the country almost in same state (if we discount the both sides allegations).

It is time to take stock of what military rule has accomplished in Pakistan. General Musharraf is the fourth in a line of army chiefs who seized power on essentially the same pretext: getting rid of venal politicians, saving the economy from bankruptcy, and preserving the security and integrity of the country. None of the past three military rulers successfully achieved these goals, and all of them left their office involuntarily.

Aitazaz Ahsan also insisted that for right distribution of power and independence of judiciary, judges must come forward and become role models by fighting for the very rights the courts stand for.

Justice Muneer A Malik, who is defending Chief Justice Iftikhar on Musharraf’s reference against him was the most impressive in terms of witty and thoughtful speech. I always jokingly call him an intellectual and not a lawyer but then again all great lawyers were also great intellectuals.
He emphatically stated that the independence of judiciary is a long journey and that every long journey starts with a small step which we are already undertaking. Muneer A Malik quoted the famous example of Chief Justice Sir Edward Cook in the era of James I, king of England. He also quoted a very famous saying of French Statesman, Charles De Gaulle which was only too sharply relevant to the disturbing situation of Pakistan Army’s increasing involvement and dependence on civil society for its operations and sustainability.

Muneer A Malik concluded with a thunderous slogan of “No Army can stop the march of an idea the time for which has come” And yet the most euphoric and iconic point in his speech was his soliloquy (sort of) when he contemplates, what’s at stake here (in defending Chief Justice and independence of Judiciary), is it my life? No, it’s not my life. It’s the lives of my two sons”.
Wow, I haven’t had a chance of listening to a Pakistani speaker in recent times with such eloquence and clarity of thought and yet resoluteness of ideas and conviction that he’s so filled with.

Addressing a televised, packed seminar on the separation of government powers, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who was suspended two months ago, called judicial independence a “bulwark against abuse of power.”

“Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” Chaudhry said, slightly misquoting 19th century British historian Lord Acton. “The courts must be independent. Courts should remain free from the pressure of the executive.”

CJP further added that, “Abuse of power often occurs in a system of governance where there is centralisation of all power in one person or in one institution and that is dangerous.”

Now that the seminar is over and despite the Supreme Court’s decree that no political remarks be made in any lawyers’ seminars or public meetings, the whole auditorium roared with “Go Musharraf Go” slogans and many others on the same lines, what remains is to see the unresting situation at Government’s decision makers’ heads and not to forget our military generals.
Oh, talking about Military Generals, how about a serious and details look at what our Army is made of (structure wise) and how democratic is army (of any country) despite many claims of the Military Head and twin of President Bush (in his stupidities).

Permalink [9] Comments

From Dawn: http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/26/top4.htm

He was speaking at a ceremony to launch the test transmission of DawnNews television.

While praising the launching of the country’s first 24-hour English language news channel, President Musharraf described it as a unique event. But at the same time he did not hesitate in taking full credit for the mushrooming of private television channels, saying that whatever freedom there was in the country it was only because of him. “I alone had insisted that we must give them freedom so that the media could hold everyone accountable,” he said while recalling the early years in power when he had framed the media policy.

Gen Musharraf rejected the long-stated view of the journalist fraternity that the freedom of press in the country was the result of their campaign and persistent demand and said he was not aware of any such demand when he decided to ‘give this freedom’.

It was quite apparent that the president had come to the launching ceremony to not just praise the media, or take credit for his policy, but also to speak his mind about the prevailing trends in newspapers and television channels. And although he repeatedly assured the select audience, and the country at large, that such level of independence would continue, President Musharraf’s insistence was that such freedom should come with a certain level of responsibility.

He gave examples from the television coverage of the war in Iraq, and said while western media never showed bodies of their own soldiers, they had no hesitation in showing the images of the bodies of Saddam Hussain and his sons.

The other example he gave was of the recent killings in one of the schools in the United States by a gunman, and said the American television networks made a conscious decision not to show the dead bodies.

While presenting his argument, President Musharraf raised the issue of what he described as the trend of repeatedly showing gory images, blood and killings. He said such images were telecast round the clock as if they were from an India-Pakistan cricket match.

Similarly, he said the way religious extremism was glorified by showing militants in Waziristan, or the clerics of Lal Masjid, and the manner in which their views were aired, amounted to ‘brutalisation of society’.

Indirectly holding the media partly responsible for the state of affairs in the country, President Musharraf said it was creating unnecessary alarm amongst overseas Pakistani and other potential investors. He was of the view that if the media failed to demonstrate what he called a certain level of responsibility in the projection of Pakistan, then it may have a negative impact on the economic and social progress of the country.

Now you have to take this down too:
He felt a ‘negative projection’ of the country might affect the economy by scaring investors away.“We need to develop national cohesion, underplay what can lower the nation’s morale and encourage what can raise it.”

What’s with the image thing anyway? Okay, I can actually speak on it some time later.

Permalink [2] Comments