Adil Najam
In yet another historic decision, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has decided that former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, exiled by Gen. Musharaf, can return to Pakistan. According to The News:
The Supreme Court of Pakistan in a landmark verdict on constitutional petitions of Mian Nawaz Sharif and his brother Mian Shahbaz Sharif, Thursday announced that Sharif Brothers are Pakistanis and can return home and participate in the national politics. The seven-member larger bench of the apex court, led by Chief Justice Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, in a brief judgment said that under Article-15 of the constitution, the petitioners are citizens of Pakistan and therefore their petition is hearable. According to the Supreme Court’s decision, under Article 3 of the constitution no citizen of the country can be kept outside the country and cannot be stopped from his or her return to home.
The document presented by the government on previous day has no constitutional position. Senior lawyer Fakhrudd
in G. Ibrahim appeared before the court in the case on behalf of Sharif Brothers. Attorney-General Malik Qayyum, Ahmed Raza Kasuri and Ibrahim Satti were the counsels of the federation. Reacting on the decision, Hamza Shahbaz, son of Nawaz Sharif, talking with Geo News said that the Supreme Court’s decision is the victory of Nawaz Sharif’s eight-year stand. During these eight years, Sharif Brothers have spent very hard time. He said that this decision is not the victory of any individual but of Pakistan.
The Pakistan Muslim League (N) has welcomed the verdict announced by the larger bench of the Supreme Court. Leader of party Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan said that a delegation of his party would soon go to London to determine the procedure of the Sharif Brothers’ returning home. Immediate after the decision, people seemed very enthusiast outside the Supreme Court and thousands of PML (N) workers chanted slogans.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan has, once again, rendered a decision that has not just created a buzz but effectively changed the entire political landscape of Pakistan. The big news here is the potential return of Nawaz Sharif but the continuing big news is that the institutional reincarnation of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which has become which has effectively become what it was meant to be. The final arbiter of constitutional sheninigans by political forces.
This means that unless extraordinary measures are taken by the government, we could be set for a real political showdown in the next elections. What this does to PML(Q) - or for that matter to PML (N) as well as other parties - is to be seen. But heads will already be spinning about which karwatt this oont will eventually settle.
It is also interesting that while all the deal-talk went on between Benazir Bhutto and Pervaiz Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif’s political capital might actually have been expanding. Even if he had stuck to principal just because he could not do otherwise, there are many who have actually found his stand to be ‘principled’ and it is likely that between that and this decision, his political capital has in fact increased… at least in the short term. What remains to be seen is whether he and his party will be able to politically capitalize on this; and how.
in G. Ibrahim appeared before the court in the case on behalf of Sharif Brothers. Attorney-General Malik Qayyum, Ahmed Raza Kasuri and Ibrahim Satti were the counsels of the federation. Reacting on the decision, Hamza Shahbaz, son of Nawaz Sharif, talking with Geo News said that the Supreme Court’s decision is the victory of Nawaz Sharif’s eight-year stand. During these eight years, Sharif Brothers have spent very hard time. He said that this decision is not the victory of any individual but of Pakistan.







































Well one one hand Nawaz is less corrupt then BB but on other hand, he want to consolidate all power in PM office.
We need a democracy with check and balance. By removing check-and balance as Nawaz did last time, we will get absolute dictator; more then Zia, Ayub or Musharaf.
Ch Shujaat was the interior miniter at that time who ordered the storming, he is the PML president today.
How ironic - Didn’t Nawaz Sharif and his goon desecrate this very same institution that is now saving his sorry behind from oblivion.
Hopefully the Nawaz will be taken to court for running the judiciary into the ground when he was PM.
SC could have forced the publication of details of the deal quite some time ago. Looking back, in the future, these decisions will be viewed as personal vendetta - a clash of personalities.
I am no fan of past and present crooks but I worry that this judicial activism is eventually going to haunt us in the long run.
Rehan, pardoned sentences can’t be reenacted according to the law. The president has the power to pardon, but he does not have the power to retract a pardon.
The only thing government can do now is to bring up new cases against Nawaz Sharif.
It is a win-win situation for Nawaz Sharif now. Imprisonment will make his popularity sky-rocket.
For those criticizing the judiciary, even Sh Rashid and Shujaat have stated that this judgement was inevitable. The government’s case was too weak.
Im sad at The Return of the Ganjay trilogy.
Nawaz is by no means shareef. If he comes back, i think the gov would can reinstate the corruption cases against him and put him in jail again where he belongs along with Benazir, who is a traitor. (BTW, why was Zardari released?)
Right now our options are either fundamentalists who want to take us back to the stone age or corrupt leaders like Benazir and Nawaz. I’ll choose the lessor evil. My vote will be for Musharraf as i perceive him as a liberal middle and i support him at least because he is the president who has done most for the country out of all these crooks. The only problem i see in him is why he even deals with backstabbers like BB and MQM thugs just to stay in power. He should take the people in confidence and trust his guts.
As for Ganay, man, if i get my hands on him, i’ll rip his implant hair out.
We as nation are corrupt, just try to find out any selfless leader in pakistan who truly wants agenda meant for progress of Pakistan,,, may be some one will find …. none… or may be one or two…
Jaasay log wasay hukmaran
It is proven by our religion too. Then why we people are crying?
Secondly who are in favour of present setup, can any body find Mr clean in present setup… may be one or two… otherwise maximum are corrupt /involved in cartels for personal benefits. We should not forget sugar crises, stock exchange scandal, wheat scandal etc….
For the people who claim CJ is acting prejudicely, i think they must justify their statement as he is not acting beyond constitution and regulations..otherwise he would have been simply dumped by media especially Lota media already on service of establishment.
So we should not cry because corrupt nation always have corrupt rulers…
“In yet another historic decision…”
Is it? Historic? Considering the 2004 ruling by the same court that Mr Shahbaz Sharif could not legally be kept out of Pakistan was still in effect. The interesting fact of 2004 ruling however was that the Supreme Court dismissed the petition on the grounds of its maintainability in the Supreme Court. It said that, it is the basic issue of unalienable rights of an individual and referred the case to the high court. So ‘historical decision’, I don’t think so, I smell vengeance on SC part and Nawaz Sharif in a perfect example of opportunism took every advantage of this active hostility between Musharraf and SC.
To be sure, whatever the state of the document, its authority or its maintainability, no one has contested that the document has been forged. Shahbaz Sharif admits in his recent interviews that these documents were indeed signed by the brothers. This is in total contradiction of what the Sharif brothers have all along claimed that they never had any ‘deal’ with either the government or the Saudis.
The question is:
Is Nawaz Sharif ethically and morally justifiable in coming back to Pakistan and contest elections? Does he have any moral ground when he claims that he has always practice the ‘politics of principles?’