Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan Writes to Lawyers

Posted on December 5, 2007
Filed Under >Adil Najam, About ATP, People, Politics
Total Views: 56696


Adil Najam

A letter, reportedly written by Barrister Aitizaz Ahsan, is making the rounds on the internet. Those of us who are used to organized propaganda and lies and also have to deal with sophomoric behavior of folks who regularly post under multiple names and multiple false identities on blogs like our own (ignoring that the IP shows up at the back end) can get cynical about what is or is not authentic. However, indications suggest that this letter is, in fact, from Aitizaz.

It is certainly well thought out and proposes a reasoned strategy for what might be done by the lawyers movement IF (and only if) the major parties choose not to boycott the forthcoming elections. What do you think of the strategy offered here? Can it work? Is it the beginning of a new political movement? The beginnings of a “Justice Party”? What is the next steps for the lawyers and judges who have been at the forefront of political events in Pakistan the last many months?

The Indus Saga by Aitzaz AhsanWhether one agrees or disagrees with Barrister Aitizaz Ahsan, the fact of the matter is that he is today a major figure not only in Pakistan’s politics and civil society but also in Pakistan’s polity. Anyone who has ever met him and discussed just about anything – from poetry, politics, culture, history, society, cricket and more – would testify that even when you do not agree with him (and many don’t) you cannot honestly deny his intellectual ability and breadth. Those who wish to deny it should read his book The Indus Saga; which, again, can be disputed for its argument but not for its freshness of approach and breadth of imagination.

I say all this not because I wish to contextualize the position taken in this letter, but because I would like our readers to not contextualize their comments by their own current view of the supposed writer. The argument here is worthy of intellectual analysis on its own and one hopes that this is what our readers will do. (Unfortunately, the quality of intellectual engagement with arguments in our comments section has been rather dismal in recent days and sometimes one feels that they have slid into the abyss of sloganeering and naara baazi and no more; we hope, however, that this state is temporary and our readers will soon return to the incisive commentary that made us want to run this blog in he first place; if not, we assure you we have better things to do with our time).

Here, then, is the open letter for Barrister Aitizaz Ahsan to the lawyers community in Pakistan:

December 05, 2007

My dear colleagues,
Asalam o alaikum.


As I write this from a sub-Jail, let me tell you how proud I am of each one of you and of myself to be part of the community that is writing the present chapter in the history of our unfortunate country. As you are all aware we the lawyers are the vanguard in this long over due mammoth battle for civil rights and democracy in our country.

As for myself, jail is not new to me. I was first arrested as a one-year old in the arms of my mother when she courted arrest in 1946 after my father and grandfather had already done so in the Pakistan movement. During the Martial Law imposed by General Zia-ul-Haq I was arrested and detained without trial several times for long terms only because I pursued, even then, the ideals of democracy and an independent judiciary.

Let me assure you that the sacrifices that you have given and the selfless courage that you have shown for a completely selfless cause of an independent judiciary and civilian rule have no parallel anywhere in the world, even in countries from which we have borrowed the concepts of the rule of law and judicial independence. By seeking the restoration of the Chief Justices and Judges of all provinces we are in fact seeking to the save and strengthen the Federation. Ours is a noble cause.

You know that Muneer Malik, Tariq Mahmmod, Ali Ahmed Kurd and I have never wielded any weapons. We have never broken any law. We are no terrorists. We are men of peace. Yet we have treated worst than terrorists while were in jails.

In fact, when arrested, I was only seeking to persuade, through cogent and respectful arguments, 11 senior most judges of the country that an Army General’s attempt to contest elections for the office of President was completely in breach of his own oath under the Constitution. And then what happened? Just because that Bench seemed likely to give a verdict according to the express language of the Constitution, he sacked the Chief Justice of Pakistan and other judges of Supreme Court and of the four High Courts. Only the judges who were willing to legitimize him were retained.

What happened thus was unthinkable in today’s world. It brought disgrace to the country. No such step was ever taken even in any “banana republic”. Yet because of us lawyers and the support we are getting from our kindred in the media, the general public and the students, no one can write off this country as a failed nation. However, for the first time since 1947 we are in the middle of a fresh struggle for independence: independence of civil society and civilian institutions.

It is in the context of ultimately achieving our one point goal of restoring the pre-November 3 status quo and the fact of a form of elections being upon us, that I propose the following:

ONE, Our stand for boycott would be vindicated if ALL major parties also boycott.
TWO, Our stand would also be vindicated if even one of the two major political alliances (ARD or APDM), decides to boycott.
THREE, IF however ALL major parties decide TO CONTEST elections, we must devise a strategy to use the momentum to our own advantage. How? My proposal is that:

In situation THREE the hustle and bustle of the nation-wide election campaign may suck in all politically active persons within a few days. Local issues, of roads, water, sewage, schools and other services, may begin to engage people seeking promises of redress of their immediate miseries. Our one demand may go onto the back-burner of the public mind. People will become pre-occupied with other issues. That is what the regime is counting upon.

What then must be done in situation THREE (and ONLY in situation THREE)?

We have to keep the issue of the “deposed” judges alive. We have to keep the spotlight on our demand. To that purpose I propose the following:

  1. The Supreme Court Bar Association, while continuing to deny validity to this election prescribes its own OATH to be taken and signed by all CANDIDATES. The oath will require each deponent to swear that, if elected, he/she will move the necessary motion/resolution/law/amendment required to ensure the restoration of the “ousted” judges, to pursue such motion etc, to speak in its favour, and finally to vote for it. (I suggest below the contents of THE OATH).
  2. The contents of the oath will be widely publicized by representatives of the Bar at all levels through press-conferences and media reports.
  3. It will be made clear that no candidate who does not take this oath is approved by the Bar as deserving the vote of the people irrespective of the Party he belongs to. If more than one candidate in any one constituency takes the oath, then these alone will be declared as the “pre-qualified” candidates disqualifying others from the support and vote of the people.
  4. The oath alone is not enough. It is the MANNER IT IS TAKEN that is also vital. To involve the people and the Bar Associations nation-wide, the SCBA and the PBC must give a call that all OATH-TAKING CEREMONIES:i. will be held in District Bar Association premises before the General House;
    ii. the oath will be taken by a senior Office-bearer of the DBA and recorded by the electronic media and the press.
    iii. records will be maintained at the District, Provincial and Central level by the Bar Associations of the oaths.
    iv. daily press conferences and press-releases at the respective District and Central levels will announce the names of pre-qualified candidates issuing the names to the press.
  5. Keeping members involved in this most engaging activity will also make the boycott of the courts (wherever prescribed) more viable and effective for a longer period.
  6. Since all this activity will be WITHIN THE PREMISES of the Bars there will be no premature confrontation and this activity will be entirely lawful and sustainable. Yet it will become the most prominent activity in public eye, nationally and internationally. In fact I expect the electronic media to run strips of the names of candidates who have or have not taken oath.
  7. Each ceremony will involve a maximum number of lawyers and political workers across the country. We will also thus cause a synchonised nation-wide activity with the Bars themselves playing the lead role while highlighting our own primary demand. At the end of the day we may have create a large lobby (perhaps even a majority) committed to our demand as we begin to ride the “judicial bus” that may yet be necessary by late January, 2008. You may even today propose a tentative date for that event.

The proposal above is in respect ONLY of situation THREE. In that event, where ALL major political parties are participating in the elections, a mere placid boycott called by lawyers may not work. We have to be realistic. The electorate in that situation will get involved, distracted, indeed consumed by electoral activity. We, and our one demand may be sidelined. And if it is sidestepped during the elections it is unlikely to be of very high priority after the elections. We have to make it the PRIMARY ISSUE IN THE ELECTIONS.

We have a nation-wide network of District Bars. We can make it worth their while for candidates to adhere to our aspiration of restoration of judges. In the process we can, across the country, create a significant and vibrant political activity. And we will also keep the initiative with us. I am sure that within days candidates of parties already committed to the restoration of judges and independent candidates will be jostling for time to take the oath before the full blaze of the media. I can see them printing photos of the oath-taking ceremony on their posters and publicity material to assure the voters that they are committed to us. It will keep the issue of the “deposed” judges right up-front, and may be make it the most inescapable electoral issue.

We are today contesting the most unique case in the history of the world. In this case, our professional fee as lawyers is whatever this country has given each of us to date and our client are 160 million people. But our clients’ interest, our nation’s interest, we must, safeguard at all costs. If one unarmed lawyer could win the independence of this country, I do not see any reason why we, thousands of lawyers, should not be able to achieve victory.

If we put out hearts and souls into this perfectly legitimate and peaceful enterprise we will prevail. We shall overcome.

Yours truly,



I, ___________________ s/o ____________________ candidate in Constituency No. ______ to the ________________________ Assembly do hereby solemnly take oath and swear in this ______ day of __________, 2007(8) that in case I am elected in the forthcoming elections I will devote all my energies, powers privileges, rights and authority, (including the privilege to move and initiate legislation/amendments/motions/resolutions and the right to vote and/or to speak) and exercise them at once from the first available opportunity after taking oath so as to ensure that the Supreme Court and the High Courts revert completely to their status as on November 2, 2007 and that none of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and the High Courts of the provinces are in any way impeded from performing the functions of their respective offices by any person, authority or any purported law in the shape of any PCO or any other Proclamation by whatever name called and for that purpose to do all in my power and authority till such time as I am member of the Assembly.


Office-bearer DBA _______.

107 Comments on “Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan Writes to Lawyers”

  1. Rehana says:
    December 5th, 2007 10:52 pm

    An interesting proposition and it does appear to be authentic. I agree with his analysis of the situation, the electioneering process will suck all the air and this keeps the focus on the judiciary. He is also betting on the fact that majority of the people are in support of the deposed judges and he might be right about that.

  2. Watan Aziz says:
    December 5th, 2007 10:59 pm

    24 judges of high courts

  3. Israr says:
    December 5th, 2007 11:00 pm

    It is I think a very smart realistic approach and will galvanize the students, civil society and the Lawyers to demand of the Politicians to categorically declare there position before the election and the q league will have to decide if they think the people are going to be in power or Musharrraf. Actually I think the Poeple should take such an oath too, I will make a petition for people to sign too and post it on
    Those who agree can sign it and I will forward the list to SCBA

  4. December 5th, 2007 11:17 pm

    Thank you Adil Najam for posting this brilliant piece reportedly written by Barrister Aitizaz Ahsan. Only a few moments ago, I have posted my response to some bloggers’ comments on my piece running below yours. I take the liberty by posting some portions of my response here as well due to its relevancy to your piece.

    The magic of a blog like ATP is its capacity to provide equal opportunity to readers who wish to express their views , even though the motivation and identities of some bloggers remain unknown to readers. The inherent danger that some may abuse a forum like this is insignificant as compared to the benefits it offers. In this age of information, even an average reader can easily judge who is being intrusive and showing arrogance and self-righteousness. I believe it is more rewarding when ideas are challenged and issues are debated in the open. This is how a writer can see both the strengths and weaknesses of his/her presented thoughts.

    And if we truly believe in freedom of expression, we must not only tolerate dissenting points of view, but should also show courage and grace in accepting the validity of others

  5. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 6th, 2007 12:06 am

    This combined with the struggle started by NS to galvanize the opposition, combined with the protests of the civil society, students, lawyers, judges and ordinary citizens heralds a new dawn. Insha Allah the dark night would be over and the perpetrators of coups and emergencies would be brought to book with lessons for any future military (mis)adventurer.

  6. whole LOTA love says:
    December 6th, 2007 12:28 am

    where Mr. Aitezaz Eshas was when secret agencies were kidnapping, torturing and killing people in KARACHI during his own party’s government and where all those lawyers and judges were when Nawaz shareef was being tried in the MILITARY COURT for hijacking Musharraf’s plane???

  7. Just cause im there -- I think says:
    December 6th, 2007 1:45 am

    So how does one justify this letter………………. I would classify this under lessons from history……….

    A Letter to Benazir Bhutto…
    From Ghazala Minallah Daughter of Late Justice Safdar Shah

    Dear Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto,

    I was absolutely shocked and amazed at your latest statement regarding the judiciary. How could you, of all people, say that you believed in an independent judiciary BUT that personalities did not matter? If personalities did not matter then why was Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry removed?
    Why were some judges locked up whereas others were not? If personalities did not matter then why is Musharraf waging a personal war against the CJ? You do not have to be a genius to figure out the reason. How can you separate the personalities from the institution? What you have on Constitution Avenue right now is a besieged and helpless building. The unfortunate but harsh truth is that right now we are a besieged nation as well.

    Ms. Bhutto, I am writing to you because your statement has shocked and disturbed me to the extent that I feel I have no option but to reach out to you in this manner. I would like to remind you, since you seem to have forgotten, that you too were the victim of a corrupt judiciary. If Justice Iftikhar had been the CJ of the Supreme Court at that time then perhaps your father would never have been hanged. Had the entire bench been like the present one then there would have been a unanimous judgement. But the judgement was not unanimous – it was a 4 to 3 split

  8. chirand says:
    December 6th, 2007 2:08 am

    To be honest I find this letter a bit surprising. It is a major shift from Aitazaz Ahsan’s very idealistic stance to a pragmatic one – Is he(being forced into) following the party line?

    Would it not make more sense to detail the benefits of option 1 and 2? and a strategy to achieve consensus on the boycott?

    Aren’t options 1 and 2 more appealing to the general public?

    I think the collective message to the public at this time should be DONT go to the POLLS! Lets see how much credibility the election has with less than 5% turn out!

    It’s too soon to give up on principles, and too early to be looking for backup plans and option 3s in my POV.

  9. December 6th, 2007 3:13 am

    Interesting read, but I wonder whether with such a focus on option 3, whether due to the general trend of politicians to never-boycott or due to Ahsen’s own forecast, would be beneficial in the longer run.

    Afer all the military came into politics to ‘save’ Pakistan, now they won’t go. the lawyers might become the next parasites of our political system…

  10. Kashi says:
    December 6th, 2007 4:33 am

    I am ashamed that my nation include people like Musharaf, Fazlu, Benazir but I am thanful to God for giving us people like Chief Justice and all other judges who refuse to bow down to the tyrant. I am proud that we have lawyers, teachers, students and journalist who refuse to surrender to a dictator.

    I am sorry to Ghazala Minallah because she wasted her time time writing to Benazir. You cant change the heart of the woman who sold her father’s blood. I never liked father Bhutto but atleast he has the honour to die rather than to shake hand with Zia. (By the way congrats to Ijaz -ul-Haq for becoming a Chaudry. Atleast he knows who his daddy is!)

    For people like ‘whole Lota love’ I have one thing to say, beware of the time when the same killing starts in Karachi and Pir Sahib and his followers start asking God for a person like Chief justice. Why we Pakistanis alway try to harm our own blood. Why talking about what Aitizaz was doing? talk about what you doing? For first time Pakistanis are talking about rule of law but we have our own flesh and blood stabbing us in back.

    I agree with Aitezaz proposal. It realistic.

    If not today than tomorrow we will see the light. And if not tomorrow than day after tomorrow Musharaf, Fazlu, Benazir and their cronies will get what they deserve.

    PS: Anybody knows when Mush is leaving Army House as he retired and he is asking ‘retired’ to leave their houses. So when our enlightened moderator will leave Army house.

  11. Nayab Khan says:
    December 6th, 2007 5:08 am

    This letter is a fake!
    ATP will loose its credibility if they keep on posting such letters.

  12. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 6th, 2007 5:25 am

    @Chaudry Aitezaz Ahsan

    before any thing about his missive addressed, we see
    the personage on the surface,
    a professional lawyer,
    Politicians Chaudry,
    VIP of corrupt “Awami” PPP,
    Leftist, proletariat, tendency trotskyist,once admirer of Mao,
    Disliked right hand of Bhutto, inherited by BB,
    Nazarbandi extended for another month by who ?
    who was behind, remember Aitezaz made a verty curious
    statament on Benazir after the blast
    A potential remover of BB

  13. Jamshed Nazar says:
    December 6th, 2007 5:27 am

    I think boycotting the election does not make sense.

    The candidates are asking for votes from the general public and not from the Establishment. Why should the elections be boycotted??
    Indeed, restoration of the pre 3rd Nov judiciary is a worthy cause. Whoever person / party wants this restoration to take place, should use this as the top priority of their election manifesto.

    Boycotting the election itself is to deny the public its right to representation.

    I disagree with Aitzaz’s postion that participating in the elections is a “Third Option” only.

    If he strongly believes that “Boycotting” is really a top choice, then he should not have submitted his papers to contest the polls. His collegue lawyer Hamid Khan did just that.

    I think Aitazaz is a political animal and is not acting on what “pincipled” stands he is proposing others to take.

    By contesting the elections on the PPP ticket, he is validating the leadership of BB including her methods and tactics.

    That the PPP has pushed for the NRO and used it to get a clean chit against Zardari and others should have been enough reason for Aitazaz to quit the PPP atleast. In fact, he should have quit the PPP long time ago when he was part of the BB government in the first and the second tenure and witnessed all the government corruption and mismanegement by BB and her hubby.

    By sticking with the PPP under the leadership of Benazir and at the same time pushing for the restoration of Justice Chaudary, Aitzaz has just played the role of bad cop in stengthing the hand of Benazir aainst Musharraf. Is there any denying this fact?

    Imran Khan, for all his faults and not so pramatic approach, at least has the guts to tear up the nomination papers. I disagree with his position not to contest the polls. However, I appreciate the fact that having concluded that his position is correct, Imran sticks with his conviction. Aitazaz on the other hand, plays to the galleries while at the same time benefitting from the sad demise of Justice Chaudary and his collegues.

    Realistic as we all are, the actions that we take tell us more about ourselves than our words.

    Musharraf and Justice Chaudary have shown who they are and where they stand. I hope that Aitzaz Ahsan also has the courage to be a man on his own right and act upon what he professes as his beliefs.

    I have all respect for the lawyers movement and its other courageous leaders including Munir Malik, Ali Ahmad Kurd and others. However, I think that the movement has played right into the hands of PPP thanks to Aitzaz’s political manouverings and BB’s trump moves.

  14. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 6th, 2007 6:40 am

    @Chaudry Aitizaz Ahsan,

    Why don’t you go ahead and eliminate evil’s candidate
    remove her, as you have the potential, other wise you
    will be blamed in the history of tyrany in Pakistan.
    Clean up chap!! you can do that !! civic sense.

  15. Nayab Khan says:
    December 6th, 2007 6:50 am

    I do not support lawyers movement but yes, i would like to see all the judges except X-CJ and Aitzaz to be employeed. This was a political issue, poor judges and lawyers got hammered!

  16. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 6th, 2007 7:01 am

    I think that Aitezaz is being more practical by keeping all the three options in mind. And he should immediately start his “judicial bus” march. Also I think time is ripe for the creation of the Justice Party because justice is now what people are really craving for and has lately been in short supply.

  17. Abid says:
    December 6th, 2007 7:39 am

    While it is indeed commendable for Aitizaz Ahsan and other lawyers who have taken a stand against Musharraf, it is time for concrete actions towards house cleaning.

    It should NOT be either and/or if – contingent to boycott or contest of elections.

    Aitizaz Ahsan contend:

  18. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 6th, 2007 7:45 am


    I think its not just the Pakistani elite who is throwing spanner after spanner in the works of the civil society so as not to make them challenge their authority on the resources of the country, chief among them being the military ologarchy. I think it happens everywhere where people start challenging the status quo, as they have started now in Pakistan.

    In the long run the elits always looses, because it is but a small minority. Also many people from elite themselves become part of the movement like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif. And sometimes its just “the idea whose time has come.” So no matter how hard the elite tries to defeat the elements for true enlightenment, the latter would win sooner or later.

  19. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 6th, 2007 7:52 am

    Adil Najam,
    this my sincere appeal to Aitizaz if he can have this post!!

    @Aitizaz ki Baybassi,

    Yoon to BB kay pass, sadion say ik Aitizaz hay
    Aur Wo bhi Hamari Bazm mein ik Aitiraz hay

    BB ko kiun naseeb ho yeh khosha-e-chaman
    Randa-e-Dargah bana, phir bhi ik Aizaz hay

    Berukhy BB ki, Badmizaji Pinky ki ay Rafay
    Sabr itna hay Aitizaz mein, hamein Aetiraf hay
    Rafay Kashmiri

  20. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 6th, 2007 8:22 am

    New Qaumi Naghma

    @24 judges vicitm of vendeta from the establishment
    boot-lickers of Mushy the secular/zindeeq.
    These judges merit a salaam on their courageous act :

    ” Hum apnay ‘oath-shikanon’ ko salaam kartay hein
    In ‘mush-shikanon’ ko sslaam kartay hein ”

    Please Inform others and spread it every where

  21. Faisal says:
    December 6th, 2007 8:26 am

    Let Bushra Aitazaz comment on the letter and then whatever the leader would say,we should commit to that.

  22. faisal says:
    December 6th, 2007 8:47 am

    I think there is a lesson to be learnt here. Look the way Musharaf literally cried with tears when he had to let go some of the power. He is a megallomaniac. Certainly he is mentally a very disturbed man.
    On two occasions, he has openly said that people of Pakistan deserve neither the human rights nor democracy. He actually represents the mentality of top brass of military who considers us as “bloody civilians

  23. mrizvi says:
    December 6th, 2007 8:59 am

    For me Aitzaz Ahsan is the “Cassius” in this play!

  24. Raza Rumi says:
    December 6th, 2007 9:23 am

    Abid: well said – there are larger and more fundamental issues that should become part of the movement.

    Ahmad R Shahid: Pakistani ‘elites’ and ‘the civil society’ are terms that need to be defined as the lines are pretty much blurred.


  25. Abid says:
    December 6th, 2007 9:55 am

    @Ahmad: We can hope and pray that

  26. Zeb says:
    December 6th, 2007 10:29 am


  27. Pervaiz Munir Alvi says:
    December 6th, 2007 10:33 am

    “In fact, when arrested, I was only seeking to persuade, through cogent and respectful arguments, 11 senior most judges of the country that an Army General

  28. Ahsan says:
    December 6th, 2007 11:03 am

    The Indus Saga, the book written by Aitzaz Ahsan is a well researched history of Indus Valley civilization and its people. It clearly traces the origin of the present inhabitants of this region. The claim that he makes that the origin of Pakistan lies in the Indus Valley Saga is only partially true. It is true only if one considers the present day (after 1971) Pakistan, but this theory does not fit for the original Pakistan of 1947 when the people of Soni Dharti were integral part of that Pakistan which the Muslims of pre-partitioned India claimed. Personally, I find Aitzaz Ahsan honest researcher and sincere Pakistani. He is a visionary with short vision but with a long illusion.

    I totally agree with his idea that all political parties should take part in the coming election. The elected parliament members then should work for the establishment of the democracy and an independent judiciary. Where do we find honest and sincere democrats? To remedy this problem Aitzaz Ahsan proposes that each candidate takes an

  29. Nayab Khan says:
    December 6th, 2007 11:06 am

    I still do not believe that the letter is from Aitizaz Ahsan, Doesnt sound like him at all, perhaps someone else dictated him!!
    If my efforts to convience my countrymen to goto polls and select a government that can do things as majority desires (give vote of confidence against Musharraf and reinstate Judges) then i am a ‘PROPAGANDIST’,
    My Stance as is:
    1. Musharraf deserves credit for doing a lot of good things.
    2. PCO was a wrong decision but was the only way to stop x-Judges who were playing in the hands of politicians and News reporters who were very pecimistic. All the judges except X-CJ should be reinstated.
    3. We should go to the polls and vote for the rightfull candidates. If we don’t then nothing will improve or change!

  30. Pervaiz Munir Alvi says:
    December 6th, 2007 11:43 am

    I read your this one cute line about Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan with a smile: “He is a visionary with short vision but with a long illusion”. What would ‘long vision’ and ‘short illusion’ look like.

  31. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 6th, 2007 12:05 pm

    @Pervaiz Munir Alvi,

    “What would ‘ long vision’ and ‘short illusion’ look like . ?

    ‘ BB, Fazlu seat adjustment ‘

  32. December 6th, 2007 12:14 pm

    Aitazaz is the greatest leader we currently have, he should be voted the most distinguished Pakistani of 2007, also see:

  33. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 6th, 2007 12:25 pm

    @hakim hazik:

    I think he is the best of the lot.

  34. JQ says:
    December 6th, 2007 1:17 pm

    Firstly, the credibility of this letter is in question. Only a confirmation by Mr. Ahsan would clear doubts.

    More importantly, I find it rather unappealing to support a movement based on a simple oath. In a country like ours where moral and ethical values particularly in politics take the rear, can we possibly expect our truly ‘honest’ and ‘upright’ political ‘leaders’ to keep their word. Nawaz Sharif, BB, Choudries… all have histories of lying, and cheating. They’re all the same. Doesn’t matter if they’re under oath. They will do whatever meets their own personal ends.

    Ideal pragmatism is the need of the hour. We have reached the ideal stage. Time to be pragmatic.

  35. December 6th, 2007 1:46 pm


    Superb post, I back Aitzaz and the lions of the lawyers movement in their struggle.

    We should support them ahead of any political affiliation for their cause is in the service of all of Pakistan and not based on winning power. Thus we must back Aitzaz and the other lawyers in their quest for they are busy in a mammoth battle-

    The pursuit of principles must defeat the pursuit of profit, I urge all of Pakistan to make their choice, for this choice will make or break this new Pakistan.



  36. syed ali raza says:
    December 6th, 2007 1:55 pm

    oh isn’t it the GREAT AITIZAZ, last time i checked AITIZAZ was not only the one to abandon PPP back in 1985 but was also the one to have MISS CHRISTINIA LAMB kicked out of PAKISTAN when she wrote an unfavorable piece against BB’s Government, after AITIZAZ snuck back into PPP to get a job as the Interior minsiter!!.
    this proves my point that PAKISTANIs in General are the worst kind of AMNESIACS who keep forgetting the history
    THE FE included or may be it is intentional on his part???
    Just BCZ AITIZAZ represented a SC JUDGE who himself was instated on a PCO, does not make him a HERO.

  37. Kruman says:
    December 6th, 2007 4:35 pm

    No one is talking about the human tragedy unleashed by Musharraf’s unconstitutional act. Here is a small aspect of that in the voice of an innocent child.

    “My baba was aainst Musharraf, that’s why he was arrested,” says a little innocent kid of Ali Ahmad Kurd.

  38. Roshan says:
    December 6th, 2007 4:53 pm

    Thanks for bringing this issue on ATP.
    It seems to be the first intervention from Aitzaz Ahsan since he has been put in solidarity confinement and later on house arrest. He is undoubtedly pragmatic in his approach by toeing the lawyers movement with political parties. He is absolutely right that people particularly in rural areas would not be able to participate in lawyers campaign as they would be busy in elections process. He infact wants to keep this movement alive and continued.
    He is also trying to persuade political parties to toe with Lawyers Movement with an agenda of ‘restoration of judiciary’. And he is the first person in our political and lawyer fraternity who came with some roadmap to achieve the ultimate goal. I am pretty optimist, this one point agenda is a roadmap for Musharraf’s exit from his presidency too.
    Look at the flip flop position taken by APDM regarding the boycott for election and then intending to participate. Similarly, ARD is doing the same by saying that we would contest elections but the option for boycott is still open. Rather than leading the nation, they are confusing the masses by using old political tactics (SIYAASI CHAAL).
    I have read lot of comments that why Aitzaz is still with BB when she and her party is not encouraging him to lead this movement. Please try to see it from the perspective that he doesnt want to be a part of notorious camp (Khar, Leghari, Jatoi, Kh.Tariq Raheem, Sherpao, Faisal Saleh, Rao Sikandar), which was mentored by PPP but later on ditched it. Its an issue of his political integrity and credibility. I am glad, after getting so much fame and support from the public he is still with his party, regardless of party’s unfair treatment with him. I salute him for his courage, loyalty and patience.

  39. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 6th, 2007 5:00 pm

    I see no reason that why Aetazaz should not be with the PPP. The future of Pakistan is to be decided by PML(N) and PPP, no matter how much people hate these two parties. While the likes of PML(Q) would be history soon, these two parties would live on taking new shapes given new challenges. And ultimately Benazir, Nawaz Sharif and Musharraf are all going to die then the new blood would be fused into these parties.

  40. Nayab Khan says:
    December 6th, 2007 6:46 pm

    Ahmad bhai, when is NS and BB going to leave?, they had two terms and still thirsty for third, we have been listning to their lies for last 18 years! Does PPP & PMLN has no leadership? I am sure when they leave their sons and daughters will take over the party.

  41. Watan Aziz says:
    December 6th, 2007 7:30 pm

    The farce that the educated of Pakistan have been playing on the people of Pakistan has come to an end. The public slapping around of the Chief and manhandling of his wife was the last straw that broke the camel’s back.

    Hence forth, the rule of the game will be the rule of the law. It will not be in a single day, but it will be. The dam has broken.

    Three women stepped up and showed enough it enough. The first was gang raped; the second fell on feet of Sultan Musharraf in view of multitude, pleading for her missing and the third stood alone before the powerful, fulfilling her duty before the Creator, looking for her husband.

    Every fifth grader knows Pakistan was created by the votes of women. Every fifth grader will know, justice was established by will of these three heroines of Pakistan. No need to search for perfection in them nor their plight. It is irrelevant, if they have any faults or not. They showed the faults of the system.

    Pakistani system is not perfect. The people are not perfect either.

    The last person I rooted for was ZAB. After what he did to Mubshir, Ramay and Miraj Khalid, I learned never to root for any person.

    If we chase personalities, we will run from pillar to post and back. We should uphold for a system, ideals, and goals based on justice and equity. Who ever will fit, will do the work; whoever will not fit, will fall off to the side. Only then you will have equity and justice.

    Pakistan Zindabad
    Pakistan Pa’indabad

  42. Talawat Bokhari says:
    December 6th, 2007 8:07 pm

    Jio Aitazaz. I would suggest only one change in the objective of the justice movement. Should its objective be not a ‘Civil’ rule instead of ‘Civilian’ rule as Mush has since become virtually a ‘civilian’ ( He is very particular about it as he has stopped even mentioning ‘general’ with his name) though still with ‘un-civil’ rule with the ‘PCO+Fatwa’.

  43. December 6th, 2007 9:30 pm


  44. MQ says:
    December 7th, 2007 8:03 am

    To boycott or not to boycott? There are powerful and compelling arguments on both sides. One cannot help but get swayed from one side to the other and then back.

    Aitzaz Ahsan has tried to find a via media, which he has elaborated in his letter. Aitzaz, being a PPP ticket holder, has the advantage of knowing the mind of PPP, which leans towards not boycotting; and as a leader of the lawyers’ movement he is also familiar with the sentiments of the lawyers’ community.

    Meanwhile, brotherly Saudi Arabia, as always, has lent its helping hand to Pakistan and made an offer to Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to visit the Holy Land (on a trip long enough till things cool down in Pakistan). But the judge is believed to have turned down the offer.

  45. Nayab Khan says:
    December 7th, 2007 8:48 am

    I have posted a comment several times on geo’s website (Just playing reverse psychology), but their moderators have always blocked it. (On Support Geo and Give your opinion)

    “Geo has hosted so many shows against the government and Musharraf but i have never seen any efforts from GEO to show true face of Benazir, Altaf or Nawaz. Have you ever dared to compile a documentary about their corruptions and assets? NO!”
    How about a documentary on history of PPP or PML or a comparison of their agendas and policies along?”

    Is that offensive?
    try posting something.

  46. Daktar says:
    December 7th, 2007 9:40 am

    Nayab, I guess Geo is smarter than you thought. They detected the falsification in the message and blocked it. Many quality sites do. I think from past admn comments that this blog also blocs people posting under multiple ID from the same IP for the purpose of spamming or flooding a particular point to make it seem that it has greater support than it actually does.

    Also, no one except outmoded ISI types or those still seeing 1960s flicks anymore believes in the reverse psychology nonsense. You guys should also give up on it.

    By the way, does that mean you have also been playing ‘reverse psychology’ on this blog :-)

  47. Nayab Khan says:
    December 7th, 2007 10:08 am

    you got me dude !

  48. Nayab Khan says:
    December 7th, 2007 10:13 am

    Dawn and Geo has reported that “ARD and the APDM failed to agree on reinstatement of sacked judges”. Both are fighting for democracy and freedom in the country but they have not agreed on reinstatment of judges. I am sure PML is for judges but PPP is against it altho Aitazaz is PPly.
    Strange isn’t it?
    I believe judiciary issue is a more important then the elections, who agrees?

  49. Nayab Khan says:
    December 7th, 2007 10:21 am

    @Daktar, call it nonsense or whatever, all i wanted was to see was a well reserched documentary (supported by proves) on PPP’s & PML’s (parties and their leaderships) history, Corruption cases & assets of the leaders (Mush, Nawaz, BB, Altaf, Imran, Qazi.. etc) and qulifications, achievements & statements of key politicians.
    I am sad that they blocked me, aren’t they denying me the freedom of speech?

  50. Reluctant Expatriate says:
    December 7th, 2007 4:09 pm

    I am so sad and worried about the current status of the suspended judges and imprisoned lawyers such as Aitaz Ahsan. These guys have paid a huge price for their stand about the supremacy of the law. I am concerned about their wives and kids being threatened with eviction from their homes.

    These judges and lawyers have shown the way to the corrupt politicians and military dictators. I hope Pakistanis as a nation appreciate and reward their actions. I wish every Imam in his Juma Khutba talks about their stand instead of pouring venom against women. I wish every high school and university teacher talks about it.

  51. December 7th, 2007 4:28 pm


    Date: November 06, 2007, Vancouver Br. Columbia
    To: Barrister-at-Law Aitzaz Ahsan, M.A. (Cantab)
    President Supreme Court Bar Association
    FROM: Farouq Mallal, LL.B
    Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public (Ret

  52. December 7th, 2007 5:01 pm

    A democracy protects itself by NOT having a REGULAR & STANDING army.(US/UK/Israel/Canada). We wanted to save ourselves from indian incursions.See how our own army has repeatedly conquered our nation. This is the price we HAD TO pay.
    Now we must think how we can have a PEOPLE’S ARMY.
    This army has been exploited by its own highest commanders. How can a general think about ruling Pakistan when he has no credentials even to reach its top?
    Useful idiots have been promoted as COAS because they looked harmless. See the ‘harm’ down that road !
    It costs billions to remove a DICTATOR ( Hitler/Mussolini/etc.) . It costs ‘blood & tears’ for a people to struggle against the DICTATOR.
    AMERICA was placed exactly in our shoes in the 18th century.
    PAY NO TAXES was the war-cry. It shook the British masters.
    Time has come to do that same with a dictatorial set-up in Pakistan.
    ( I got SJ in 65 war and fought both the ’65 & ’71 war without being in the army. I denounce Musharraf as TRAITOR NO.1 of Pakistan ARMY & Pakistan. YES, WE HAVE TO WIN OUR FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE ONCE AGAIN.)

  53. Watan Aziz says:
    December 7th, 2007 5:35 pm

    There is presently a Brigadier in Pakistan army, from whom we need to save this country from.

    Ayub Khan was a Brigadier when he started to plan for his ‘role’.
    Yahya was a Brigadier when Ayub took over.
    Zia was a Brigadier when Yayha took over.
    Musharraf was a Brigadier when Zia took over.
    (folks, if I have one of the ranks wrong, get over it.)

    Sultan Musharraf is a good man. There is hardly a person who does not like him. He has done well for Pakistan. We owe him our gratitude.

    For the last eight years, he wrote laws, amendments, notifications, PCOs, you name it he did it. The infamous counsel gave him all the goodies. Unfortunately, his counsel forgot to take into consideration that the law says you cannot be elected President if you are on the payroll of the nation. Unfortunately, this is a minor technicality put in for a reason: to avoid exactly what just happened.

    And when that technicality came up, he decided to tear up the contract he wrote himself.

    If we all decide to ignore this fact on the account that we love this man, then every man we love can break the law.

    If that is the case, why bother to have laws? Lets do love contests in the courts. If you love the guy let him go, if you hate him, nail him.

    Sultan Musharraf has done his good deeds. Did his best. Now time is up. It is time to take goodbyes and plan a nice exit. And lets have another first, he will leave with the gratitude of a nation. Something, Pakistanis have been unable to accomplish as of yet. Is that not a wonderful scenario to have?

    Pakistan does not need to be saved from Sultan Musharraf. Pakistan needs to be saved from the ‘next Brigadier’.

    It is the law, stupid.

    Pakistan Zindabad
    Pakistan Pa’indabdad

  54. December 7th, 2007 7:05 pm

    Dictators have the full budget of their countries at their disposal. Musharraf collected 20 billion US dollars annually from Pakistan; paid 0.015% to his parliament. To get that SAFE & CONVENIENT PARLIAMENT back he has done all this . Dictators are mainly THIEVES who pocket the national moneys. Mush had no LATERAL or VERTICAL agency/person to check his spendings. Safe to conclude that he was pocketting one third of our budget. That made him the richest man in the world. Uniform gave him that.
    Now his best shot is to send Shaukat Aziz to Wall Street and rule the ‘bourses’ of the world.
    Pakistani thugs have beaten the Nigerian ones.

  55. December 8th, 2007 5:27 am

    20 billion USD per annum collected by one person (Shaukat Aziz) helped Musharraf to hire 300 servants sitting in the Parliament, Army and Police) is 406 crores per person. How could a Judge unseat Mush in that Parliament. Why should Police not become Mush’s baton. Why should the generals not obey him?
    The equation is simple. HE HAS MONEY TO PAY.
    TRACE THE MONEY AND YOU WILL REACH MUSH’S NECK. HERE IS “ALIBABA & HIS 300 THIEVES”. I have no doubt that OATH or Affidavit cannot prevent that same comfortable Parliament from coming back.
    It is too late.
    God has a NAME ( Alhisab). Let us collect the mathematics of this spoilation;we shall win.

  56. Nayab Khan says:
    December 8th, 2007 6:29 am

    Interesting posts by tiwani & watan. Lets talk about next government and get a government we deserve that can kick mush out of presidential palace if thats what he deserve. If we want democracy then thats how it should be done.

  57. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 8th, 2007 7:10 am

    If we want democracy there should be no more PCOs and military Generals acting as saviors.

  58. December 8th, 2007 8:38 am

    Dictators hide their absolutism by saying that DEMOCRACY will come; how can it come when you have taken the wrong train called ABSOLUTISM.
    The starting point of DEMOCRACY is a people’s ability to hire and fire its rulers. The longest any dictator has ruled was Porfirio Diaz of Mexico. He ruled for 32 years and every year he used to give a ‘lolipop’ to his people by saying ‘We are reaching democracy’. How an a duly retired COAS think about bringing democracy in three phases lasting from oct ’99 to 2012? Who gave him that mandate?
    Could the then supreme court give him a blank check mandate?
    Mush must be laughing at us during his late night gossip with his friends.
    He’s Pakistan’s Porfirio Diaz. I have written a novel about it all ( The Prince & the Dancing Girl) google it.

  59. Nayab Khan says:
    December 8th, 2007 10:40 am

    Ahmad, My concern is huge power gap!!

    Do you not agree that if we remove Mush tonight, there will be a huge gap in the management given the fact that we have a president who knows what the world is thinking/expecting, what dealing we have/had with them, what our stand is on various issues, what internal and external threats we are facing, how our nuclear programme is going, which major projects are going on etc? In our fight against the taliban and militants i think it is very important to keep army and politics together.

    We can learn from our own experience, when Gen Zia was killed there were loads of issues left in aray. what ever his deal was with the U.S. and having control on Taliban was lost. We lost our control on the mujahidien in kashmir and the Sikh movement in india. He was the king of the board.

    Can we replace an experienced pilot with an air hostess?. I do not think so.

    Musharraf is wrong, but i think the only way forward is to go to the polls, vote for the rightful candidate and then let the parliment take over the issue of presidency, judiciary, security and economy.

  60. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 8th, 2007 2:08 pm

    Nayab Khan:

    If the world acts on your thinking then no leader would ever retire because the incumbent knows the best. The problem is that to take care of such situations the countries build their institutions. Musharraf and the Army is only destroying them.

    Hell didn’t break loose when Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) died nor it ever would because history is older than the minion Musharraf it won’t stop for a single moment and cry even if Musharraf was removed from office.

    There would never be any dearth of people who can take over and lead like Hazrat Abubakar took over.

    After Hitler others took over and Germany was set on the path of development of which it is still reaping fruits.

    After Mao, Deng Xiaoping took over and set China on the path of development.

    We don’t need Musharraf or Army, we need institutions and unfortunately Army is bent upon destroying every institution that comes in the way of its power and money. The Supreme Court being the latest.

    Pakistan would have been much better off had the Supreme Court declared the candidacy of Musharraf illegal and unconstitutional and had sentenced him for violating the constitution on Oct 12, 1999. In future no one had dared challenged the writ of the law in Pakistan.

  61. December 9th, 2007 12:40 am

    I must have written over 1000 articles on the ineptness of Pakistani generals. My very first article in 1968 was: ” Politicians are behaving like Generals & Generals have become politicians”. Look at Gen. Musharraf. He is talking (thinking himself a hero of a people leading them out of a dark tunnel of ignorance) talking about three phases he’d pursue to set right democracy in Pakistan. Who gave him that mandate even to think like that? A bit of discretion? No sir. They are diseased with cancerous mindset wishing to become politicians. The Supreme Court gave him three years but he decided on three phases!
    A general has to learn military subjects like correctly deploying his forces, correctly reading the opponent’s plan, taking the first correct move to counteract that. He has to learn from 16000 battles fought by mankind so far and come up with the right plan of action. His forces, equipment, ammunition is to be used against the enemy of his people;not on the people themselves. He has to learn Major Tactics that can grant him victory over the enemy. Our generals are talking about social changes. I just saw Musharraf having a dinner chat with some guests. It was all SOCIAL CHANGE. I was reminded of an author Lini S. May who wanted our generals to become heroes who changed their society. Once I read the syllabus of Imperial War Course. My friend late general Sarfraz Khan gave it to me to read. It was not war but about war. Such courses are needed by the western governments to prepare youngmen who reign in generals for the civilian masters. Our war course teachers cannot name even ten Field Marshals who commanded more than 80 divisions during WWII. These generals have a scanty military knowledge but they feign erudition like great thinkers.
    So he got seven years to govern and wants another seven years to govern rightly this time. I say the Indians gave us a chance of a lifetime to defeat them in 1971 war. Is there any general who can prove me wrong and win 5 lac rupees after an open debate.
    Look at their palaces. Even the Kings don’t live like that. There is no general who can produce published record of predicting wars correctly. Because they don’t know war.

  62. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 9th, 2007 8:02 am

    Saaed Tiwana:

    you are right. Pakistani Generals know only two things: power and money, the rest is just too un-important for them to waste their time on, be it war or controlling narcotics.

  63. December 9th, 2007 9:17 am

    In 1974 a colonel came to me and wanted me to write on this subject:” Manstein’s summer offensive in Russia ( february ’44to oct.’44). He was to deliver that lecture in WAR COURSE. Ruefully he said:” I searched all libraries but only Malenthin wrote about it…but only one page!”(we did not have internet in those days)
    I was then a major , squadron commander in 39 Cavalry. The Colonel was Div.arty commander.
    Equally ruefully I made two observations:
    1. Artillery is not a fighting arm; why promote generals from it? Do we have artillery divisions like India ?
    2. The topic is a non-starter because Germans lost three major battles in 1943 (Kharkov1943 , Kursk 43 & in Caucasia). The Russians went to a continued offensive during rest of ’43 & 44).
    It was a question posed to a war college student viz. Explain General Niazi’s victory over Indians in East-Pakistan during 1971 war.
    It didn’t happen that way.
    I wrote him 35 pages sitting right in front of him from memory. He got top marks.
    Our top military echelons are made of ‘characters’ who are constantly praising eachother.
    In 1971 Mujib Shami ( editor) published my front page story in “Zindagi” where I had been informing GHQ of a coming defeat. The entire record is in black & white.

  64. Dilawar Khan says:
    December 9th, 2007 12:33 pm

    I believe the proposition is interesting as it will undeniably tie the lawyer’s struggle for the independent judiciary with the politicians for the first time. This deposition will also keep the issue alive post FARCE ELECTIONS 2008. However, i feel the signatories to this deposition will harm their success chances and will only be elected in a significant minority. I guess its better than nothing

  65. December 10th, 2007 3:48 pm

    History tells me a way out of our present predicament:
    1. PML(N) fights election in PUNJAB ONLY.
    3. JI+ANP IN NWFP.
    Punjab: Nawaz Sharif or his appointee.
    Sindh: BB or her appointee.
    NWFP. Qazi Sahib or from ANP.
    Baluchistan. Nawab Bughti’s son.
    That is how a new government can come about inspite of Supreme Court being a govt. organ.

  66. zia m says:
    December 10th, 2007 4:33 pm

    Saeed Tiwana,
    Your strategy could work if NS is willing to let BB become the next PM.

  67. shahid says:
    December 10th, 2007 6:04 pm

    i felt myself ashamed for pakistani
    these so called saviour of nation fully destructed my pride to be a pakistani

  68. December 10th, 2007 6:59 pm

    New PM should do following ONE THING:
    INCORPORATED IN THAT CONSTITUTION (Article 6). Normally BILL OF ATTAINDER ( PARLIAMENT EXECUTES THE VIOLATERS OF CONSTITUTION; AND NOT COURTS.) is not incorporated in any modern constitution but in Pakistan’s case it was necessary to keep violaters of constitution away.
    After that PROVINCES show work for people.

  69. December 11th, 2007 12:34 pm

    Barrister Aitzaz wants the new Parliament to take an OATH before Bars attest them. Well, We all know that our 1973 constitution contained a BILL OF ATTAINDER ( article 6). A bill of attainder is defined as a legislative act that singles out an individual or a group for punishment without a trial.
    This article 6 was actually a safeguard to implement separation of powers. Those who took OATH on 1973 constitution can now be divided into two parts:
    First part, those who did not commit treason by siding with a coup leader. Second, those who sided with the Oliver Cromwell.
    Those who sided include judges, lawyers, state functionaries, army officers and COAS Musharraf.
    William H. Rehnquist, the last CJ of US supreme Court defines TREASON to be the sole criteria for such a punishment (page 166).
    England executed plenty of VIPs under this law of the land ( Catherine Howard , Thomas Cromwell, Archbishop Laud, Earl of Stafford.Oliver Cromwell)
    Oliver Cromwell was dug out and hanged in the marketplace until birds ate him.
    In a BILL OF ATTAINDER the individuals lose their CIVIL RIGHTS TOTALLY. They cannot own any property, nor give an order.
    How about hanging the Parliament and Officers who staged and sided with a treasonous coup.
    The law has been violated. If the NS parliament will not sign the execution BLACK WARRANT, they themselves shall come under the violater list. How can Aitzaz forget the violated BILL OF ATTAINDER ?

  70. December 11th, 2007 5:03 pm

    Page 81 (William H. Renquist–The Supreme Court) suggests that since the US constitution did not carry a “Bill of Attainder”, the Court could decide punishments by Legislature as unconstitutional.
    In our case (Pakistan) you cannot convict Ayub Khan or Yahya Khan on a Bill of Attainder ( being ex-post facto laws) but Ziaul Haq and Musharraf do come under the IRONCLAD non-judicial punishment. Those who sided with these two also come under the ironclad clause (Article 6)
    Now the question: Who will ‘bell the cat’?
    The answer is ANY LEGISLATURE SWEARING OATH ON 1973 CONSTITUTION including COURTS and EXECUTIVE.Like DESERTION from the Army is a crime that hangs for life, the BILL OF ATTAINDERS are permanent, ironclad and lawful.

  71. December 11th, 2007 10:32 pm

    Did anyone see the newly appointed COAS take an OATH on 1973 Constitution?
    If not, his appointment becomes null & void and subject to the Bill of Attainder supreme law.

  72. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 12th, 2007 4:48 pm

    @Barrister Aitizaz,
    Exit from History
    you must show conscience of a jurist, and react accordingly,
    not a flagrant Chaudry style deficit of courrage, typical of
    PPP opportunists mentality. You will be out of the history.

  73. zia m says:
    December 12th, 2007 6:09 pm

    Well done Aitzaz Ahsan.
    You give us hope for future of Pakistan.

  74. Nayab Khan says:
    December 13th, 2007 4:33 am

    Atlast today Aitzaz Ahsan decided to withdraw his papers, the guy has some moral afterall.

  75. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 13th, 2007 6:45 am

    Zafar Ali Shah, the PML(N) for the three constituencies, has also withdrawn his papers. It seems like that this struggle is gaining momentum and might Insha Allah lead to permanent exit of the Armed Forces from the politics and administration of the country and might also lead to the disgraceful exit of Musharraf who deserves to be hanged for twice suspending the constitution for saving his own skin. His crimes are far greater than anybody else’s in the 60 years history of the country, which has seen four military tyrants and hordes of unknown IDIOTS hailing from the Armed Forces.

  76. Owais Mughal says:
    December 14th, 2007 11:28 pm

    900 choohay kha kar billi Hajj ko chali. Barrister Aitzaz was part of the PPP government which did extra judicial executions in Southern Pakistan. Did we hear a single word from him on upholding of law then. today he is acting as champion of law.

    meetha meetha hap hap, karwa karwa thoo thoo :)

  77. December 15th, 2007 2:10 am

    Oliver Cromwell started as a palimentarian sent to collect ‘fines’ from the King’s exchequer. He was sent away. Then he led an army ordered by the parliament to collect fines ( The King was fined if he did not come to the parliament with fiscal reports). The king was overpowered and executed. Then Cromwell, an oppurtunist, decided to rule himself and he ruled with an iron fist. He died and left his son the rule. The son was too weak and was overpowered. Then the parliament issued a BILL OF ATTAINDER against Oliver Cromwell and others who ruled by sheer MIGHT (not RIGHT). The BILL OF ATTAINDER denies all civil rights to the accused.Cromwell was dug up and his carcass hanged until birds ate it up. Such was the severity of BILL OF ATTAINDER. It DOES NOT EVER FORGIVE.
    Any parliament sworn to defend the constitution has first to issue BILL OF ATTAINDER to those who violated the Constitution. Such a drastic law was incorporated in the 1973 constitution ( article 6). It can never,ever, go unexecuted. I want Aitzaz to read this law carefully and give the nation of list of those who conspired to obvert the only constitution which was UNDOUBTED ONE. Those who refused to take OATH on PCOs are still the Supreme Court as per law of the land.

  78. abdullah says:
    December 15th, 2007 10:39 am

    Where were mr Ahsan and company when Iftikhar mohammed chaudhry and co taken oath few years ago under pco with mushraf? why mr ahsan and co never had a decency to say a good word for those (including Justice (r)Wajih uddin) who refused to take oath under pco and musharaf?

  79. Daktar says:
    December 15th, 2007 10:51 am

    Abdullah, I have never understood this logic of yours that so many people use against people they do not like.

    So, are you saying that because someone does not call wrong wrong the first time therefore they have no right to call it wrong now?

    Or are you saying that because someone did wrong once they have no right to do right now?

    Or, even if they are still not sincere, is it that if someone who has done wrong in the past now calls wrong wrong then it actually ceases to be wrong.

    Shouldn’t the first point of departure be whether the thing itself is right or wrong.

    Democracy, for example, does not become wrong because Benazir (who was corrupt) or Nawaz Sharif (who was incompetent) or Pervaiz Elahi (who is a thug) say they want democracy. You can doubt the integrity of these people but that does not make democracy itself bad.

    And of Aitizaz, his career is actually mostly one of integrity. He too has made mistakes but probably far less than most others. If we seek for the ‘perfect’ leaders who has never changed their views we won’t find anyone. Even the Quaid supported the British and then the Congress before he changed and prophets spent long periods living with and agreeing with the same people and practices they eventually rose against. So, please, let us not demand perfection. At least not until we have attained it ourselves.

  80. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 15th, 2007 11:40 am

    Owais Mughal,

    @ ye billi jo Hajj par Bhijwai’i ja rehi hay , 900 choohay
    khanay kay ba’ad kia Hajj karay gi ??

  81. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 15th, 2007 11:57 am

    Barrister Chaudry
    Aitizaz Ahsan,

    @ On this blog you got 70 posts out of 79 in your
    praise, wah, wah,kia baat hay, you are the best, but
    you know what is the truth, and that is, you have an
    opportunity to change the course of history, go for a
    coup against BB, throw her out, you know what is she
    upto, remember history will never pardon you
    ( hay, between you and me, we have the same age, better
    listen to me, it will be fair for everyone, mark my word)
    Do you still remember
    Abdel Majid Sallik ? who said,

    Chargh-e-zindagi hoga Ferozan, ham nehin hongay
    Chaman mein aiygi Fasl-e-Baharan, ham nehin hongay
    Jo mazi tha kabhi roshan, to ham ne thay Hazir
    Jo mustaqbal kabhi hoga Darakhsan, ham nehin hongay

    So hurry up ! do something.

  82. zia m says:
    December 15th, 2007 1:10 pm

    Daktar,you are absolutely right.

    Rafay Kashmiri,I always thought after Hajj everybody was like a new born guess i was wrong.

  83. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    December 15th, 2007 2:32 pm


    @ sorry can’t help you, don’t have experience yet,
    new born yes thats right, but one has to grow up from there!
    any way 900 big choohas weigh about 85 kg min, its impos
    to perform every thing at Hajj.

  84. Jamshed Nazar says:
    December 17th, 2007 8:36 am

    I am much impressed by Aitzaz Ahsan for picking up his side, correctly, with the Lawyers’ movement. It is high time that he came out of the shadow of PPP / Benazir.

    The lawyers movement needs to set its direction correctly and to stick to principles of Justice, Equality and Rule of Law. Real Politik is a game musical chairs and there will always be a time for it in the future.

    By sticking to the principles of the movement, Aitzaz and his collegues have shown that they have what it takes to lead the movement against all odds.

    Restoration of the judiciary is a just cause and all forces that support the rule of law should cooperate include those who take part in the elections like Nawaz Sharif and those who do not like Aitazaz and Imran Khan.
    I personally, support the principle of not boycotting the elections and using this oportunity of elections 2008 to get a peoples’ verdict in favor of the principle of Judicial Independence and rule of Law.
    Since BB does not support this position, it was a necessasy requirement that Aitazaz distance himself from the PPP by withdrawing his nomination papers.

    Now, I think, the next step for the Lawyers movement to define with clarity the Rule of Law Ideals to the people of Pakistan.
    The movement should take care that it does not become a movement for Justice Chaudary against Gen Musharraf. It should really focus on Rule of Law and how this rule of law can improve the condition of the common man in the street.

    Rule of Law when applied to the Police, Judiciary, Army, the running of the State itself should result in predictable improvement in the quality of life of the common pakistani.

    This is a common sense agenda for the common man. Roti, Kapra, Makaan and all other benefits would follow if Justice prevails in society. This must be the new direction that a progressive Pakistan should take.

    Aitzaz is lucky to be the vanguard of this new Pakistan.
    Good work man – Good work!

  85. Ahmad R. Shahid says:
    December 17th, 2007 1:02 pm

    Many people are questioning Aitezaz’s association with PPP while siding with the rightful movement of the lawyers against the illegal and unconstitutional hegemony of the Army over the state institutions. For once, who want to get rid of the PPP or the PML(N) for that matter, are living in a fool’s paradise. They won’t disappear and would remain part of this socierty as long as people vote for them, which we must respect. Also any change that would come, in my opinion, would come from the same forces and same parties no matter how much we detest them. Everything changes over time as Iqbal so rightly said:

    Sabat ik taghayyer kou hai zamaney mein


    The only thing that remains the same, is change

    Change is the essence of life, in fact the essence of everything. So these parties would change over time so would every other institution. Since our history is so short, just over 60 years, we start thinking that everything is so permanent and we even start doubting the existence of the country, “I saved Pakistan” syndrome. Pakistan is not that weak that it would obliterate just because one person is being over-thrown or being shown the door as our self-appointed Savior-in-Chief and his havaris tend to think. But with the passage of time, we would have something more to write on our history books, and we would start loosing our love affair with the personalities and would start developing likeness for the institutions. That is already part happening.

    Ayub was once advised to become the King though perhaps he was too dumb to understand that. Yet he made himself the Field Marshal without winning a single war. Then we had the Yahya Khan of alcoholic fame. He divided the country into two yet had the nerves to ask Bhutto to keep him as President. He was rightly kicked out of the country. Then we had our own brand of “holier than thou” Zia-ul-Haq, who didn’t doff his uniform till he breath his last. Yet divine help saved Pakistan from Pakistan’s third “Savior”. Now we have the self-righteous, arrogant and “holier than thou” Musharraf. When we would get rid of him? Only time will tell. But he would only be the fourth in the series of “Saviors”. But thanks to the love-lost for personalities that we as a nation are showing, Musharraf had to doff his uniform while still being in power. That is no mean achievement of the civil society and a sign of us getting mature as a nation.

    But insha-Allah we would get more mature with the passage of time and especially after Musharraf leaves power and tends to his assets got just because he was the General of one of most corrupt Armies in the world. I hope that both NAB and ISI investigate his assets and reveal them to the nation.

    I hope that military doesn’t ever interfere in our national affairs again. But till the time it controls our major institutions it would remain a pipe dream. There is a very high probability that there might yet be another “Savior” amongs the ranks of the military who might be waiting for the right moment. But thank God that he would only be the fifth such IDIOT. So naturally people won’t “love” him as much as they did and still do his/her (we also now have women in our Army) predecessors, because you can’t just have too many “Saviors” vying for the slot of “Top Savior”.

    That’s what has happened to other more mature nations, which have a long history as a nation-state, like England, San Marino, France, Germany, Japan, China and many others. They have so many “Giants” in their history that they don’t revere their modern day saviors. Mao was the last one in the series and he also died in 1976. Even he considered himself to be less “Giant” than many in the past history.

  86. December 17th, 2007 4:13 pm

    ” A good Time is coming Boys!”
    We tend to think that way. A general comes before us with many many medals on his chest; he is pleased because we are cheering. But he forgot to zip his trouser. He became a laughing stock.
    We are seeing such a laughable product of PMA.
    In London, in 1978 I bought a ten pound ticket to see MACBETH. As I entered the cinema hall, a cheap dancing girl was showing the porno side of her body. I came out instantly and demanded my money back. Six roughnecks invested me:” So, you want your money back !” one of them said to me.
    As he came close I put my finger on his advancing chest:” Stop. I’ve been a soldier; I can always fight back”, I said.
    The guy said:” Soldier ? I was a boy prostitute at ten.”
    I raised my hands, sdaying. ” Keep my money (vote), let me go. You win. I lose.”
    We are up against such a situation.

  87. December 19th, 2007 7:28 am

    I sent this email to daily NATION/DAWN & NAWAIWAQT .on 7/14/00.First the email:
    Dear Sirs,
    I emailed the following to the newspapers addressed on 7/14/00 ,six years ago.

    “Subject: Pakistan’s Government”.
    Text of email:-
    Sir, Thomas Jefferson said:”If a nation expects to be ignorant and free ,it expects what never was and never will be.”
    Pakistan’s present government in its very essence is unrepresentative ,undemocratic,anti-people,pro-excoriationist,dictatorial as such tyrannical,despotic,chartered , unrepresentative ,illegal ,immoral , unitary ,centralized ,single agency ,hence suppressive and constitutionally unauthorised.
    It is tyrannical because all powers and three branches of government (Judiciary,executive and legislature) rests with a single person. The judiciary took his oath ,GAVE HIM AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER TO RULE FOR THREE YEARS. The ‘executive’ carried out his ‘WILL’.The judiciary gave him legislative and constitution -amending charter ;which it had no power to do so.
    Whatever the Dictator did according to our 1973 constitution ( say holding elections) was no donation. It is our right to elect a new government with VOTES instead of BULLETS.
    But what the dictator did in violation of our 1973 constitution
    puts him entirely away from enjoying ANY CIVIL RIGHT including holding office or giving an order. That sir, is the essence of our British clause (article 6) commonly known as THE BILL OF ATTAINDER. A bill of Attainder became automatically due process ( execution of dictator without trial;no court is involved. It was a legislative punishment which is neither limited by time nor the number of persons who should be so punished. It all required the ousted Prime Minister to sign the BLACK WARRANT. If any general disobeyed, he too had to be executed.
    I did not make this law. The entire nation accepted that constitution.
    Therefore there cannot be any civil or military rights of the coup leader and his accomplices.
    Their word of command becomes VOID. They have also to pay for with their entire properties confiscated.
    What kind of lawyers do we have who got educated from England and did not know the law that a BILL OF ATTAINDER carries out the intent of the framers of constitution in Pakistan?
    PIA plane pilot saying that he was out of fuel was not observing the IATA rules. A plane going from LA to Singapore need must carry enough fuel for a return journey.
    That pilot was a part of plot. A PM can order any plane away from his country; even he can hit it to smithreens as we saw the US do it in 9/11/01. COAS was worried about the health of PM while visiting China. That sir was a codeword for asking if the coup is underway.

  88. December 21st, 2007 2:57 am

    After the oct.99 coup, it was not the Judiciary who had the ‘ball’ in its’ court; it was the Head of ruling parliament i. e. Nawaz Sharif. The constitution ( article 6) had the all-important clause in it to deal with this matter. The ‘Bill of Attainder’ authorised him to issue the BLACK WARRANT against those who had toppled his government that had been brought upon by VOTE.
    Here were two governments, legal and illegal one. The Bill Of Attainder authorized ANY PARIAMENT, even after the death of Musharraf to inflict legislative punishment upon him, to deny him all rights, life, property, peace, employment and giving an order. Such punishment keeeps future adventurers at bay.
    That law now brings more and more people in the LIST of punishment; some 3000 VIPs.
    Bill of Attainder is not a punishment for an ordinary citizen. It is a punishment inflicted on a VIP. Just google it ( Bill of Attainder) and its British history. The man has to die a most horrible death and everlasting consequences for his family.
    What the Judiciary did was to impose upon this legislative punishment, accord recognition, three years of rule, allowance to one man to change the undisputed constitution. That was unlawful intervention in a constitutional matter. The Judiciary continues to do that. It is not a question of recognition of a constitutional criminal; it is the deliberate attempt to look the other side by not letting legislative punishment reach its intent.
    I do not find fault with Musharraf except that he was an idiot-par-excellence, but like a SHEEDA PISTOLE he went about shooting his people, and his mother, the Judiciary, trailing behind him apologising for his retarded intelligence.
    Do what you must but the BILL OF ATTAINTER cannot have a limitation clause ; nor it is for one person. Whoever helps this SHEEDA PISTOLE does so at his risk.

  89. Muhammad Irfan Masood says:
    December 28th, 2007 12:14 pm

    Barrister Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan is one of the political hungry politician in Pakistan. Despite that, Nawaz Sharif made case against his late life time chairperson, he has such a good relation with Nawaz Sharif, that, he use to support him in the election.

  90. Matloob Zaman says:
    January 17th, 2008 1:34 am

    The appetite for politics brings back some of the faces that had disappeared from the political horizon of Pakistan, they are charged up and find the matter of CJ’s demise as an opportunity to launch again from a
    different looking platform. After all the politics runs in their blood and once again they have an appetite for this faculty.
    They are genius, well educated, well spoken, professional and much more, however those who have sat calmly and watched prior chaos in Pakistan when they were a part of the then governments and people were being brutalized all over, they chose not to criticize or resign from their positions in protest.
    More than anyone else the lawyers know what is termed as “conflict of interest” while Ch.Aitezaz Ahsan committed “conflict of interest” even being a lawyer.
    Ch. Aitezaz Ahsan represented Ex-CJ of SCP Iftikhar Chaudry, which brings in what is known as client-attorney relationship, having established such relationship specially under the given circumstances and basis of the case itself it becomes unethical for the same attorney to appear as an attorney in another matter in his very own client’s court, while based on their political marriage the aspiring Ch. Aitezaz Ahsan continued to conduct matters in the court of Ex-CJ of SCP specially the case he pursued again shared the basic plot of the prior case.
    The calls by aspiring politicians provoking and inflaming the common people of Pakistan have always been used as an important tool while sugar coated to appear contributing to democracy and basic rights of common people of Pakistan, this action has always harmed and damaged Pakistan in the long run with it’s ripple effects not to mention its hardly that such instigating politicans ever feel the damage done by their provocations and they dont face more than a house arrest in the luxuries of their own homes or at a vip jail and usually come out charged further more as if it is a certification of their loyalty to Pakistan and they have re-certified themselves since they were confined.
    I have no doubt that Ch. Aitizaz Ahsan and many others pursuing such campaigns are very well educated and knowledgeable people in addition to being citizens of Pakistan, however it would be highly remarkable if such geniuses of Pakistan began to use their intellect to help, aid and assist Pakistan and Pakistanis beyond the ability of counting how many heads they were able to bring to the streets of Pakistan.
    May Allah SWT protect our homeland and our Pakistani brethren and bless us with the ability to live in tolerance and co-existence, ameen.

  91. sahira says:
    January 21st, 2008 3:48 am

    thats nice one.i need more information on this topic.

  92. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    January 21st, 2008 5:31 am

    Talash-e-Gumshudah !!!

    @after the last comment of 21 dec 07 no news of
    Chaudry Aitizaz Ahsan, can any one give his news ??

  93. DR WAJID says:
    February 2nd, 2008 12:25 pm

    we r proud of u. do u know u r the most popular person after Z.BUTTO,

  94. farhan says:
    March 5th, 2008 6:24 am

    AITIZAZ is best. he is a leader of country. i pray to ALLAH that he will be our next P.MINSTER.

    Iqbal said for you.

    Iraady jin k pukhta hon nazar jin kee KHUDA pr
    Talatam khaiz moajoohn sy woh gabraya nai karty

  95. fari says:
    March 5th, 2008 6:26 am

    i said just few lines for you

    hazraon saal nargis apni benoori py roti ha
    bari muskil sy hota ha chamn mein deedawr paida!

  96. wasif says:
    March 22nd, 2008 12:12 pm

    Aitizaz Ahsan is Great Person

  97. Rafay Kashmiri says:
    March 28th, 2008 5:08 pm

    Adil Najam,

    @ Respectable Commentators, my deep condolences

    Aitezaz ka Siyyasi Khatemah

    the whole month of Dec 2007, my analysis on
    Aitezaz were 102% correct, he never listened,
    PPP has yet gulped down another of her own victim.

    PPP ka Yeh kartoos, thuss hogaya.

    Nihayat diqqat-talab kawish say :

    Wikalet mein, aiy kanoo’n-go, ab rakha kia hay
    (Punjabi caste)
    Piri-o-Faqiri mein jo hay, woh”paidah” kahan hay

    Qissah-e-Parinah howi, Khilandaron ki Dhamaal,
    Garajta barood PP ka kehein, aur phath’ta kahan hay
    Rafay Kashmiri

  98. Fazal says:
    April 29th, 2008 1:15 am

    Aitizaz Ahsan is a great person

  99. Ali Paracha says:
    May 9th, 2008 6:35 am

    Aitzaz Ahsan has graceful personality. He is great leader.

  100. May 17th, 2008 9:43 pm

    The 1973 const itution has a British draconian law: BILL OF ATTAINDERS ( punishment by the Parliament) Just google “Bill of Attainders’ and you’d find out that the ousted
    Prime Minister had the power to issue BLACK WARRANT S of death for the violater of constitution.( Now violaters). The law denies the violaters any right to life, to hold office, to order the subordinates, to hold property etc.The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in giving directions. That British law was included in the 1973 constitution to preclude marshal laws. Judges have ignored this law;hence our present predicament.

  101. June 12th, 2008 1:41 pm

    Aitzaz Aihsan if Our Great Leader Of Pakistan Peoples Party.
    I request to Mr Asif Zardari Please Think about advise of Aitzaz.

  102. muhammad says:
    August 2nd, 2008 5:01 pm

    I fully agree with Mr Aitzaz Ahsan,He is a man of commitments, One must think about it……..

  103. Azhar Ali says:
    August 4th, 2008 2:32 am

    With due respect I would to like mention one thing CH Atizaz is no doubt a great man, but sometime I feel that due to his political affiliation he always want to be prominent and sometime he ignores many things in this struggle. He always make excuses after events. This lawyer moment is successful not only because of Atizaz Ahsan there are many other lawyers in whole pakistan who are not only ignored by the media but by the leader lawyers as well, they could not get that much projection,they deserve, they secrifices their lives, I think to keep this moment intact and strong, Atizaz and other prominent lawyers should pay personal visits to all the bars of pakistan.. and encourge lawyers and their families..
    socondly I think to make the moment strong give an active role to the lawyers and their committees should be formed under the leadership of leader lawyers i.e. atizaz ahsan , munir a malik, Ali ahmed kurd , atherminnallah etc.. there should be a regular communication among the lawyers committee.. and this suggession is for future, otherwise lawyers will be divided slowly.
    Thirdly if lawyers want to expend this moment then leader lawyer will have to visit the colleges and will have to contact the unions in pakistan.. immediately. because time is running out and lawyer moment is becomeing weak.

  104. shireen says:
    August 13th, 2008 5:35 am

    I just love what he says he is always right I wanted to join him on his long march but my parents did’nt allow me…. he is always right and truth against ppp, my grandfather, an early supreme court judge (1998) did alot for ppp but they are just drinking and forgeting that court has done alot for these corrupt people… long live Aitzaz uncle take care!

  105. irfan sabir says:
    September 16th, 2008 6:01 am

    ASSALAM ALIAKUM .. I m 100 times agree with the great leader of the lawyers.Mr.Atizaz Ahsan is proud of paksitan. I m student of LL.B. in final year and i m with the lawyers movment.I joined the lawyers longe march and i also went to many times with the great movments. I proud to meet many time Atizaz Ahsan. Allah bless the all pakistanis and the leaders of Lawyer.I wish to compelete my LL.B. as soon as posibel and wanna join the movement with my passtion.

  106. December 10th, 2008 2:45 pm

    Well, am also one of almost all Pakistanis who wants justice and rule of law in the country, but the major concern is also that of the movement movers, Do we all Paksitanis, also the leaders of the movement really wants the rule of law in Pakistan? As a nation can we accept the justice and truth in it’s real soul? I think none of us wants so, we all are just pretenders not………!

  107. Watan Aziz says:
    December 13th, 2009 9:07 am

    At the end of the day, perfect rule of law and perfect justice does not exist. Anywhere. The world is not perfect.

    What is desired is people who believe in ideals.

    What is expected is semblance of justice.

    What is needed is law that is based on easily understood rules.

Have Your Say (Bol, magar piyar say)