Army and ISI have done nothing illegal: jurists

4
135

Top jurists of the country see nothing illegal or unconstitutional on part of the army or the ISI in reference to the memo issue that gives the impression of the army being a state within the state.
Asked to comment on the prime minister’s remarks against the army, Justice (r) Saeeduz Zaman Siddiqui said the army had not taken any illegal step.
“The Supreme Court ordered them (army) and they just complied with the SC orders in the memo case under the constitution, everybody is bound to do that,” he said. The armed forces of the country are performing their duties per constitution and the prescribed rules, he added.
He was of the view that no one else but the government itself was involved in such matters which generated the impression of the government being a state within the state. The government’s policies had led to an imbalance between the state institutions, he said.
Justice (r) Wajihuddin Ahmad said the army’s stance on the memo issue had led the government to conclude that the army was a state within the state. He rejected the impression being infused among the masses by the government, saying there was nothing objectionable on part of the army.
He disagreed with the government’s conclusion, saying it (government) wanted no one to check its corruption and misdeeds. He said the government failed in delivering to the masses during the last four years, adding that the allegations against the army seemed to be an attempt on part of the government to regain the lost electorate.
Senior lawyer, Anwar Mansoor called the PM’s statement more of a rhetoric. “There is nothing objectionable on part of the army or the ISI that may lead to the conclusion,” he said, adding that the prime minister tried to create hype on the memo issue by giving the statement.
Prominent lawyer Ikram Chaudhary, however, expressed a different point of view and blamed both the government and the army for the crisis that had led to a situation where the government was levelling allegations against a prestigious institution. He said the army had taken a stance on the memo issue which the government wanted to avoid, at least at the judicial forum.
He said the government was involved in corruption and least interested in public welfare, adding that the public also had grievances against the army, particularly on its policy pertaining to the missing persons and Balochistan issue. He said the common man felt that state institutions had collapsed and when the people have been left with no option but to commit suicide, the government must step down. “The government should announce fresh election as early as possible to avert military intervention and put the country on path of law instead of creating confusions,” he said.

4 COMMENTS

    • That's convenient for some power hungry people. These are precisely the people who don't care the long term interest of a democratic institution. To these people the end would justify the means as long as their own self-interest is served. The world would move, Pakistan would be left behind and suffer big time for this slash and burn policy of the power hungry people (include jurists together with politicians).

  1. "… the impression of the government being a state within the state…". Mr. Justice: how many years did you spend in school? World over, THE GOVERNMENT IS THE STATE.

  2. "… saying it (government) wanted no one to check its corruption and misdeeds. He said the government failed in delivering to the masses during the last four years, adding that the allegations against the army seemed to be an attempt on part of the government to regain the lost electorate. …".

    Mr. Justice: This is prejudging and bias. Not to mention, you should not be making public comments on a case under consideration. In a reasonable society such person does not serve the bench. They get thrown out on the spot.

Comments are closed.