Aitzaz says speaker can disqualify Gilani

By
anjum
-
12
214

Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan on Sunday reiterated his stance that only the speaker of National Assembly could declare the prime minister as disqualified from his membership. Talking to the media, he said disqualification could not be attracted by mere framing of charges and the speaker had to first discern whether a member of parliament was punished by the court of law. “If the speaker reaches a conclusion that punishment was wrong, then the matter would end within 30 days,” he said, adding the Supreme Court had observed that disqualification issue could arise out. Responding to another question, Aitzaz said the decision could not deal with the presidential immunity as this office enjoys immunity under international laws.

No PPP PM will write Swiss letter: Gilani

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said on Sunday that no prime minister from the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) would write the letter to Swiss authorities to reopen corruption cases against President Asif Ali Zardari. Speaking to lawyers at his Lahore residence, Gilani said that only the Parliament could decide if he would remain the prime minister. Gilani reiterated that he would not resign due to any political pressure or to fulfill anyone’s wishes. Gilani added that until the detailed verdict was revealed, PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif should keep his wishes repressed. He also said that Nawaz Sharif was confused and was now confusing politics too, adding, “I will actively reciprocate any kind of politics.” The prime minister added that certain elements were conspiring against him and he would not back down from any conspiracies.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

12 COMMENTS

  2. gillani is not fit to be a prime minister.
    zardari is not fit to be a president.
    kiayani is not fit to be a army chief.
    none on the chief miniters are fit for their jobs.
    rehman malik is not fit for his position.
    none of the heads of pia, railways, steel mills etc are qualified for their jobs.
    aitzaz is not even fit to be a credible lawyer.
    fahmida mirza is not fit for her job.
    haqqani was a traitor and not fit for his job.
    Am I the only qualified person left? Nobody else is 🙂

    • Please give reasons why not for Job
      Fahmida mirza & her husband & now son all are ruling —so they are no more an option
      President, PM are criminals served jail so LAW disqualifies them (not pakistani law but moral law)…..

      So please give logical arguments etc

  3. Aitzaz has truly put his name in Pak history, an insincere opportunist. Insincere to his country and to his profession.

    • Excellent comments, he will go down in history as someone who tried to undermine the key institution of the state (i.e., SC) to gain some personal benefits from his corrupt masters.

      Pooh!!! Life-long we strive to earn good name, but our instinctive Greed & wishfulness drag us to the ebb of disrespect in a jiffy.

  4. enough is enough we can not take any more of this we must come on streets if IK gives us a call and take ownership of pakistan from these pharhos (may allah punish them their wicked deeds)

  5. CHORE MACHAI SHOAR,CHIEF JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN MAY TAKE SUO MOTO NOTICES ABOUT THE SUBMISSION OF SECRECTS DOCUMENTS NY AITZAZ IN 1988 I BB LATE PERIOD TO INDIAN GOVERNMENT.AFTER HIS VISIT,IMMEDIATELY THE SEPARATION MOVEMENT IN INDIAN PUNJAB WAS FINISHED.

  6. If Speaker can override decisions of Supreme Court by allowing a convicted PM to address the NA, what was wrong when President Musharraf, defied SC.

  7. If political body (parliament) can override SC verdict, then Why Supreme Court is called as Supreme?

  8. Khalid Javed…spot on….we do not need high courts & SC…why spend tax payers money if court orders can be overturned by Parliament……beside, the President can use his discretionary powers to pardon the Mr Jillani, if all legal course is exhausted…..well ! u scratch my back I will scratch yr back AAZ to YJ…..

  9. A Ahsan commented,“If the speaker reaches a conclusion that punishment was wrong, then the matter would end within 30 days,”
    Such comments open new pandora box. Speaker being single prson on one side having the autority to conclude the dicision given by 7 judges of supreme court can be wrong. Height of confusion Mr A Ahsan. What you want to prove?

Comments are closed.