Pakistan's Supreme Court Monday rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Imran Khan for not being truthful and righteous as required under the Constitution.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar rejected the petition, filed by barrister Danyal Chaudhry, on the grounds that the plea, filed at a time when Khan had not been elected prime minister, had become infructuous.

"The application has already been rendered ineffective," observed Justice Ijazul Ahsan.

The petition was filed in May last year after the apex court constituted a six-member Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to probe allegations of corruption against then prime minister Nawaz Sharif.

Besides other grounds, the petitioner had sought disqualification of Khan for not disclosing his alleged love child Tyrian White in his nomination papers for elections.

The court said that the petition was filed when Khan was an MP in the previous National Assembly, the lower house of Parliament, which has already expired, and the petition had become "ineffective".

The petitioner had also requested the court to restrain Khan from activities which could influence the JIT members.

The JIT report has led to the disqualification of Sharif in July 2017.

Sharif, 68, resigned as Pakistan prime minister last year after the Supreme Court disqualified him from holding public office and ruled that graft cases be filed against the beleaguered leader and his children over the Panama Papers scandal.

The Avenfield case was among the three corruption cases filed against the ex-premier by the National Accountability Bureau on the Supreme Court's orders in the Panama Papers case.

Pakistan's Supreme Court Monday rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Imran Khan for not being truthful and righteous as required under the Constitution.

Pakistan's Supreme Court Monday rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Imran Khan for not being truthful and righteous as required under the Constitution. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar rejected the petition, filed by barrister Danyal Chaudhry, on the grounds that the plea, filed at a time when Khan had not been elected prime minister, had become infructuous. "The application has already been rendered ineffective," observed Justice Ijazul Ahsan. The petition was filed in May last year after the apex court constituted a six-member Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to probe allegations of corruption against then prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Besides other grounds, the petitioner had sought disqualification of Khan for not disclosing his alleged love child Tyrian White in his nomination papers for elections. The court said that the petition was filed when Khan was an MP in the previous National Assembly, the lower house of Parliament, which has already expired, and the petition had become "ineffective". The petitioner had also requested the court to restrain Khan from activities which could influence the JIT members. The JIT report has led to the disqualification of Sharif in July 2017. Sharif, 68, resigned as Pakistan prime minister last year after the Supreme Court disqualified him from holding public office and ruled that graft cases be filed against the beleaguered leader and his children over the Panama Papers scandal. The Avenfield case was among the three corruption cases filed against the ex-premier by the National Accountability Bureau on the Supreme Court's orders in the Panama Papers case.

Pakistan SC rejects petition seeking Imran Khan's disqualification

Pakistan Supreme Court today ordered Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and heads of all Pakistani airlines to appear for the next hearing of a case pertaining to fake degrees of pilots.

Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar asked Abbasi to appear as former CEO of an airline along with other heads of all Pakistani airlines.

"Isn't it a matter of clash of interests?" asked the chief justice when told that the prime minister is also the head of Airblue airlines. "Shahid Khaqan Abbasi will have to appear in the capacity of a chief executive officer and not a premier."

The chief justice, who was heading a three-member bench, said that he was issuing notices to heads of all Pakistani airlines as the matter has been pending for the last four months and reports in this regard have not been submitted as yet.&nbsp

Those who have been summoned include the heads of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA), Airblue Limited, Serene Air and Shaheen Air International.

The chief executive officers of the airlines were directed to appear in person at the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Karachi Registry on Saturday.

Meanwhile, Civil Aviation Authority Director Nasir Ali Shah told the court that degrees of 1,972 people working with airlines were verified while 24 pilots were found to be holding fake degrees.

During the hearing, Civil Aviation Authority Director Nasir Ali Shah told the court that the authority has received the reports on pilots' degrees from Shaheen International Airline and Serene Air today in Karachi, while the report of Airblue was received yesterday.&nbsp

Pakistan PM Abbasi has been asked to appear as a former CEO of an airline along with other heads of all Pakistani airlines

Pakistan Supreme Court today ordered Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and heads of all Pakistani airlines to appear for the next hearing of a case pertaining to fake degrees of pilots. Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar asked Abbasi to appear as former CEO of an airline along with other heads of all Pakistani airlines. "Isn't it a matter of clash of interests?" asked the chief justice when told that the prime minister is also the head of Airblue airlines. "Shahid Khaqan Abbasi will have to appear in the capacity of a chief executive officer and not a premier." The chief justice, who was heading a three-member bench, said that he was issuing notices to heads of all Pakistani airlines as the matter has been pending for the last four months and reports in this regard have not been submitted as yet. Those who have been summoned include the heads of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA), Airblue Limited, Serene Air and Shaheen Air International. The chief executive officers of the airlines were directed to appear in person at the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Karachi Registry on Saturday. Meanwhile, Civil Aviation Authority Director Nasir Ali Shah told the court that degrees of 1,972 people working with airlines were verified while 24 pilots were found to be holding fake degrees. During the hearing, Civil Aviation Authority Director Nasir Ali Shah told the court that the authority has received the reports on pilots' degrees from Shaheen International Airline and Serene Air today in Karachi, while the report of Airblue was received yesterday.

Pakistan Supreme Court summons PM in case of pilots' fake degrees

PML-N leader and former foreign minister Khawaja Asif today challenged the Islamabad High Court's verdict that led to his disqualification as member of the parliament -- in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, media reports said.

In his review petition, Asif said that he unintentionally failed to disclose his foreign work permit in his nomination papers which was the reason for the Islamabad High Court (IHC) disqualifying him.&nbsp

A three-member special bench had disqualified Asif as a lawmaker under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution for not disclosing his employment in a UAE company as an occupation and also the monthly salary he was receiving.

The Election Commission of Pakistan had formally de-notified Asif as a member of the National Assembly after the court's verdict.

Asif had made the announcement to challenge the disqualification decision against him on Tuesday while addressing a party rally. 
&nbsp

In his review petition, Asif said that he unintentionally failed to disclose his foreign work permit in his nomination papers which was the reason for the Islamabad High Court (IHC) disqualifying him

PML-N leader and former foreign minister Khawaja Asif today challenged the Islamabad High Court's verdict that led to his disqualification as member of the parliament -- in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, media reports said. In his review petition, Asif said that he unintentionally failed to disclose his foreign work permit in his nomination papers which was the reason for the Islamabad High Court (IHC) disqualifying him. A three-member special bench had disqualified Asif as a lawmaker under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution for not disclosing his employment in a UAE company as an occupation and also the monthly salary he was receiving. The Election Commission of Pakistan had formally de-notified Asif as a member of the National Assembly after the court's verdict. Asif had made the announcement to challenge the disqualification decision against him on Tuesday while addressing a party rally.

Pakistan: Khawaja Asif moves top court against verdict that led to disqualification

Are Pakistani politicians worse than their Indian and Bangladeshi counterparts?

This was the strange query of Pakistan's Interior minister Ahsan Iqbal as he attacked Supreme Court Chief Justice Saqib Nisar for allegedly exceeding his brief.

Chief Justice Nisar has been under attack ever since the apex court disqualified prime minister Nawaz Sharif last year and ended his political career by barring the three-time premier from holding public office for life.&nbsp;

Sharif had been criticising the judiciary, especially chief justice Nisar, accusing him of imposing the "worst kind of dictatorship" in the country.&nbsp;

Sharif told reporters yesterday that suo motu actions of the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) against the federal and provincial governments in the country were nothing less than a "judicial martial law".

Joining hands with Sharif, Ahsan said: "If a judge is a&nbsp;patriot, so is a politician."

Ahsan, who is also the minister for planning, development and reforms, said one has to understand that politicians also have self-respect and dignity just as much as any army official or any judge.

Addressing a seminar on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) here, the interior minister wondered if politicians in Pakistan are worse than their Indian and Bangladeshi counterparts, the Express Tribune reported.

"Look, the Chief Justice can sit on the bench and say Ahsan Iqbal got a vice chancellor appointed," thundered Iqbal, referring to Chief Justice Nisar's remarks during a case.

"Mr Chief Justice have a heart. When you are disrespected, we are also disrespected," he was quoted as saying by Geo TV.&nbsp;

"You have no right to name-call people. You must issue me a&nbsp;charge sheet. If you have evidence, produce it before me but enough is enough."&nbsp;

The 59-year-old leader of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) further said if he had levelled baseless allegations against anyone, evidence should be given to substantiate them instead of insulting him.

Chief Justice Nisar has been under attack ever since the apex court disqualified prime minister Nawaz Sharif last year

Are Pakistani politicians worse than their Indian and Bangladeshi counterparts? This was the strange query of Pakistan's Interior minister Ahsan Iqbal as he attacked Supreme Court Chief Justice Saqib Nisar for allegedly exceeding his brief. Chief Justice Nisar has been under attack ever since the apex court disqualified prime minister Nawaz Sharif last year and ended his political career by barring the three-time premier from holding public office for life. Sharif had been criticising the judiciary, especially chief justice Nisar, accusing him of imposing the "worst kind of dictatorship" in the country. Sharif told reporters yesterday that suo motu actions of the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) against the federal and provincial governments in the country were nothing less than a "judicial martial law". Joining hands with Sharif, Ahsan said: "If a judge is a patriot, so is a politician." Ahsan, who is also the minister for planning, development and reforms, said one has to understand that politicians also have self-respect and dignity just as much as any army official or any judge. Addressing a seminar on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) here, the interior minister wondered if politicians in Pakistan are worse than their Indian and Bangladeshi counterparts, the Express Tribune reported. "Look, the Chief Justice can sit on the bench and say Ahsan Iqbal got a vice chancellor appointed," thundered Iqbal, referring to Chief Justice Nisar's remarks during a case. "Mr Chief Justice have a heart. When you are disrespected, we are also disrespected," he was quoted as saying by Geo TV. "You have no right to name-call people. You must issue me a charge sheet. If you have evidence, produce it before me but enough is enough." The 59-year-old leader of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) further said if he had levelled baseless allegations against anyone, evidence should be given to substantiate them instead of insulting him.

'Are Pak politicians worse than Indian, Bangladeshi counterparts', asks minister Ahsan Iqbal

Nawaz Sharif's party has called the Supreme Court verdict against the former Pakistan Prime Minister a "joke". The Pakistan Supreme Court, in a landmark judgement, disqualified Sharif from holding office for life while hearing a case related to determination of time duration for disqualification of a lawmaker under the Constitution. Sharif, facing corruption charges, was disqualified under Article 62 (1)(f) of Pakistan's Constitution.

"This is the same decision that led to the hanging of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto," PML-N leader and State Minister for Information Maryam Aurangzeb said.

"This joke has already been played on previous premiers and all 17 prime ministers of Pakistan have faced a similar fate," she added.

Article 62(1)(f) of Pakistan's Constitution specifies that a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) "unless he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law".

Friday's ruling addressed an ambiguity over Sharif's disqualification and whether he was barred from office for life or a specific period.

"None of the learned counsels, who appeared before us, confronted the elephant in the room i.e. the obvious interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is that lack of the qualification to a Member is the effect of declaration by a Court of Law, which is the cause and period of lack of qualification would be co-extensive with the period to the cause i.e. declaration," the Pakistan Supreme Court said in its judgement.

"...this Court on more than one occasions has already held that lack of qualification suffered under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is in perpetuity," the Supreme Court said.

Article 62 is the same provision under which Sharif, 68, was disqualified in July last year in the Panama Papers case. He resigned as prime minister in July last after his disqualification.

Three cases were registered against Sharif, his children and son-in-law in the court on September 8. His family, however, alleges that the cases are politically motivated.

Friday's ruling addressed an ambiguity over Sharif's disqualification and whether he was barred from office for life or a specific period.

Nawaz Sharif's party has called the Supreme Court verdict against the former Pakistan Prime Minister a "joke". The Pakistan Supreme Court, in a landmark judgement, disqualified Sharif from holding office for life while hearing a case related to determination of time duration for disqualification of a lawmaker under the Constitution. Sharif, facing corruption charges, was disqualified under Article 62 (1)(f) of Pakistan's Constitution. "This is the same decision that led to the hanging of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto," PML-N leader and State Minister for Information Maryam Aurangzeb said. "This joke has already been played on previous premiers and all 17 prime ministers of Pakistan have faced a similar fate," she added. Article 62(1)(f) of Pakistan's Constitution specifies that a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) "unless he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law". Friday's ruling addressed an ambiguity over Sharif's disqualification and whether he was barred from office for life or a specific period. "None of the learned counsels, who appeared before us, confronted the elephant in the room i.e. the obvious interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is that lack of the qualification to a Member is the effect of declaration by a Court of Law, which is the cause and period of lack of qualification would be co-extensive with the period to the cause i.e. declaration," the Pakistan Supreme Court said in its judgement. "...this Court on more than one occasions has already held that lack of qualification suffered under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is in perpetuity," the Supreme Court said. Article 62 is the same provision under which Sharif, 68, was disqualified in July last year in the Panama Papers case. He resigned as prime minister in July last after his disqualification. Three cases were registered against Sharif, his children and son-in-law in the court on September 8. His family, however, alleges that the cases are politically motivated.

Pak Supreme Court verdict disqualifying Nawaz Sharif a joke, says his party

By Adnan Rasool*

Pakistanis head to the polls to elect their next prime minister in July. Until then, though, the Supreme Court seems to be in charge of the country.

In July 2017, revelations from the Panama Papers leak spurred Pakistan’s high court to rule that then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had lied to the public about his family finances. Sharif, who maintained his innocence, was forced to resign as prime minister.

However, he continued to lead his Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party, or PML-N, effectively controlling Pakistan’s government. Then, in February 2018, the Supreme Court also removed him as party chairman.

Because Sharif was not “honest” or “righteous,” Chief Justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar additionally ruled, all “orders passed, directions given and documents issued” under his leadership were officially declared null.

Sharif and his supporters accuse Pakistan’s chief justice of interfering in politics and swaying the upcoming election. As a Pakistani political scientist, I fear they may be right.

Judicial overreach

Military coups used to be the biggest risk to Pakistani democracy. Thanks to coup d'etats in 1958, 1977 and 1999, my country has spent 33 years of its 71-year history under military rule.

To a people rightfully fearful of interference in their political system, then, the Supreme Court’s recent actions are alarming. By discrediting some politicians while seemingly overlooking corrupt public officials from other parties, the judiciary is effectively influencing the outcome of July’s election.

How do a nation’s top judges - people sworn to defend the Constitution - become a threat to democracy? That’s the focus of my research on judicial independence in Pakistan.

In Pakistan, as in other former British colonies, the Supreme Court has the power to take what’s called “suo motu” action. That means judges can rule on issues of their own volition, without any motion or complaint filed in court.

For instance, Chief Justice Nisar recently ordered a hearing on the rape and murder of a young child in Lahore, because closing that case quickly was deemed to be in the public interest.

As it happens, in recent years he has also removed the prime minister from public office twice, conducted surprise inspections at government hospitals, lambasted the media for commenting on open cases and ordered investigations into police violence.

Such sweeping authority creates a clash of institutions between the judiciary and other branches of government. Such competition can be detrimental to democracy. My research in several countries has found that when supreme court justices venture into political affairs, they create conflict with lawmakers and heads of state.

It is unsurprising, then, that Chief Justice Nisar’s suo motu cases over the past few months have outraged many Pakistani politicians, who say the justice is guilty of judicial overreach.

Nisar responds that he is simply following the law, adding that the “courts are not the enemies of the government.”

Sharif takes his case to the ‘people’s court’

But to some, Nisar’s timing – the lead-up to a big national election – is suspicious. So, too, is his selection of suo motu hearings: The overwhelming majority of political cases added to the Supreme Court’s docket since 2015 have focused on Sharif’s party.

The toppled prime minister, for his part, claims that he is the victim of a “judicial coup.” At rallies across Pakistan, Sharif tells his supporters that since he cannot run for re-election this fall, he must ask them, the “people’s court,” to vote for his PML-N party.

The Supreme Court has already removed one PML-N senator, and two of its ministers are under investigation for alleged contempt of court. Sharif and the PLM-N leadership cite these cases as evidence that the party is under judicial attack.

In targeting Sharif and his party, Justice Nisar has allowed the ousted prime minister to paint themselves as the underdogs, even though the party is still in power. This has strengthened the PML-N’s position ahead of the upcoming election. Currently, it is polling above its closest rivals by about eight points.

Sharif also remains the most popular leader in the country, according to recent surveys.

Chief justice or general?

Suggestions that the Pakistani military was behind Sharif’s 2017 ouster have bolstered the former prime minister’s claim of victimhood.

Credible analysts assert that the prime minister challenged Pakistan’s generals’ authority when he was in power by taking relatively noncombative approach to neighboring India and Afghanistan. Normally, the Pakistani military – whose power is so enduring that Pakistanis often call it simply the “establishment” – directs regional security.

Sharif also butted heads with Pakistan’s armed forces during his 1997-1999 administration, ultimately leading to his overthrow by the military in 1999.

Since coups are no longer acceptable in Pakistan, the logic goes, this time the generals used legal action to remove Sharif. 
Judicial overreach abroad

Pakistan is not the only place questioning the limits of judicial intervention in the democratic process.

Bangladeshi courts used their suo motu powers to prosecute and sideline a main opposition leader prior to elections in both 2008 and 2009.

In Brazil, Judge Sergio Moro faced accusations of staging a judicial coup in January when he convicted former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of corruption, likely disqualifying him from this year’s presidential election.

Brazilian courts don’t have suo motu power. But judges there have used the judicial discretion of their civil law system to dramatically expand the scope of a nationwide bribery inquiry. Upwards of 100 congressmen and senators are now under judicial investigation.

Judges in the United States, too, have the power expand the scope of a petition to the court. A classic example is the 2010 Supreme Court case Citizens United. Nominally, the nine justices were supposed to rule on what constituted political advertising. Instead, they issued a much broader verdict on free speech and corporate money in elections.

In those countries, as in Pakistan, judges contend they are simply doing their jobs, acting as a critical constitutional check on the political system.

But in a young democracy like Pakistan’s, the standoff between judges and the ruling party is fueling an unhealthy level of uncertainty during a campaign season. If the chief justice is not in fact staging a coup, I’m alarmed to say, it sure feels like he is.

*(Adnan Rasool is a PhD candidate/student innovation fellow, Georgia State University )

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Sharif and his supporters accuse Pakistan’s chief justice of interfering in politics and swaying the upcoming election.

By Adnan Rasool* Pakistanis head to the polls to elect their next prime minister in July. Until then, though, the Supreme Court seems to be in charge of the country. In July 2017, revelations from the Panama Papers leak spurred Pakistan’s high court to rule that then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had lied to the public about his family finances. Sharif, who maintained his innocence, was forced to resign as prime minister. However, he continued to lead his Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party, or PML-N, effectively controlling Pakistan’s government. Then, in February 2018, the Supreme Court also removed him as party chairman. Because Sharif was not “honest” or “righteous,” Chief Justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar additionally ruled, all “orders passed, directions given and documents issued” under his leadership were officially declared null. Sharif and his supporters accuse Pakistan’s chief justice of interfering in politics and swaying the upcoming election. As a Pakistani political scientist, I fear they may be right. Judicial overreach Military coups used to be the biggest risk to Pakistani democracy. Thanks to coup d'etats in 1958, 1977 and 1999, my country has spent 33 years of its 71-year history under military rule. To a people rightfully fearful of interference in their political system, then, the Supreme Court’s recent actions are alarming. By discrediting some politicians while seemingly overlooking corrupt public officials from other parties, the judiciary is effectively influencing the outcome of July’s election. How do a nation’s top judges - people sworn to defend the Constitution - become a threat to democracy? That’s the focus of my research on judicial independence in Pakistan. In Pakistan, as in other former British colonies, the Supreme Court has the power to take what’s called “suo motu” action. That means judges can rule on issues of their own volition, without any motion or complaint filed in court. For instance, Chief Justice Nisar recently ordered a hearing on the rape and murder of a young child in Lahore, because closing that case quickly was deemed to be in the public interest. As it happens, in recent years he has also removed the prime minister from public office twice, conducted surprise inspections at government hospitals, lambasted the media for commenting on open cases and ordered investigations into police violence. Such sweeping authority creates a clash of institutions between the judiciary and other branches of government. Such competition can be detrimental to democracy. My research in several countries has found that when supreme court justices venture into political affairs, they create conflict with lawmakers and heads of state. It is unsurprising, then, that Chief Justice Nisar’s suo motu cases over the past few months have outraged many Pakistani politicians, who say the justice is guilty of judicial overreach. Nisar responds that he is simply following the law, adding that the “courts are not the enemies of the government.” Sharif takes his case to the ‘people’s court’ But to some, Nisar’s timing – the lead-up to a big national election – is suspicious. So, too, is his selection of suo motu hearings: The overwhelming majority of political cases added to the Supreme Court’s docket since 2015 have focused on Sharif’s party. The toppled prime minister, for his part, claims that he is the victim of a “judicial coup.” At rallies across Pakistan, Sharif tells his supporters that since he cannot run for re-election this fall, he must ask them, the “people’s court,” to vote for his PML-N party. The Supreme Court has already removed one PML-N senator, and two of its ministers are under investigation for alleged contempt of court. Sharif and the PLM-N leadership cite these cases as evidence that the party is under judicial attack. In targeting Sharif and his party, Justice Nisar has allowed the ousted prime minister to paint themselves as the underdogs, even though the party is still in power. This has strengthened the PML-N’s position ahead of the upcoming election. Currently, it is polling above its closest rivals by about eight points. Sharif also remains the most popular leader in the country, according to recent surveys. Chief justice or general? Suggestions that the Pakistani military was behind Sharif’s 2017 ouster have bolstered the former prime minister’s claim of victimhood. Credible analysts assert that the prime minister challenged Pakistan’s generals’ authority when he was in power by taking relatively noncombative approach to neighboring India and Afghanistan. Normally, the Pakistani military – whose power is so enduring that Pakistanis often call it simply the “establishment” – directs regional security. Sharif also butted heads with Pakistan’s armed forces during his 1997-1999 administration, ultimately leading to his overthrow by the military in 1999. Since coups are no longer acceptable in Pakistan, the logic goes, this time the generals used legal action to remove Sharif. Judicial overreach abroad Pakistan is not the only place questioning the limits of judicial intervention in the democratic process. Bangladeshi courts used their suo motu powers to prosecute and sideline a main opposition leader prior to elections in both 2008 and 2009. In Brazil, Judge Sergio Moro faced accusations of staging a judicial coup in January when he convicted former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of corruption, likely disqualifying him from this year’s presidential election. Brazilian courts don’t have suo motu power. But judges there have used the judicial discretion of their civil law system to dramatically expand the scope of a nationwide bribery inquiry. Upwards of 100 congressmen and senators are now under judicial investigation. Judges in the United States, too, have the power expand the scope of a petition to the court. A classic example is the 2010 Supreme Court case Citizens United. Nominally, the nine justices were supposed to rule on what constituted political advertising. Instead, they issued a much broader verdict on free speech and corporate money in elections. In those countries, as in Pakistan, judges contend they are simply doing their jobs, acting as a critical constitutional check on the political system. But in a young democracy like Pakistan’s, the standoff between judges and the ruling party is fueling an unhealthy level of uncertainty during a campaign season. If the chief justice is not in fact staging a coup, I’m alarmed to say, it sure feels like he is. *(Adnan Rasool is a PhD candidate/student innovation fellow, Georgia State University ) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Pakistan's activist Supreme Court endangers a fragile democracy

In a major blow to ousted <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-court-indicts-nawaz-sharif-family-in-london-flats-case-22624">PM Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan Supreme Court</a> said today that a person disqualified under Articles 62 and 63 cannot serve as party chief.

The Pakistan <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-senate-adopts-resolution-against-ousted-pm-nawaz-sharif-21316">Supreme Court had disqualified</a> the PML-N chief from the prime minister&#39;s post in July last year after a probe panel alleged his family could not account for its wealth.&nbsp;

Sharif later moved petitions challenging the corruption allegation in the Panama Papers scandal which was rejected by the top court.

The Elections Act 2017 was moved in both houses of Parliament in Pakistan last year in an attempt to allow&nbsp;Nawaz Sharif to continue as PML-N chief.

PML-N quickly nominated Sharif as the party head just hours after Parliament amended the law to allow Sharif re-elected as party chief, however, the Supreme Court today virtually rejected the move.

Justice Nisar who was part of the three-judge panel said in Pakistan&#39;s political setup, political parties are personality driven.

The previous election bill barred from office someone disqualified under Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution, which was used by the courts to remove Sharif.&nbsp;

Experts and PML-N party members who have keenly followed the events over the past months are now awaiting Sharif&#39;s next move.

The Elections Act 2017 was moved in both houses of Parliament in Pakistan last year in an attempt to allow Nawaz Sharif to continue as PML-N chief.

In a major blow to ousted PM Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan Supreme Court said today that a person disqualified under Articles 62 and 63 cannot serve as party chief. The Pakistan Supreme Court had disqualified the PML-N chief from the prime minister's post in July last year after a probe panel alleged his family could not account for its wealth. Sharif later moved petitions challenging the corruption allegation in the Panama Papers scandal which was rejected by the top court. The Elections Act 2017 was moved in both houses of Parliament in Pakistan last year in an attempt to allow Nawaz Sharif to continue as PML-N chief. PML-N quickly nominated Sharif as the party head just hours after Parliament amended the law to allow Sharif re-elected as party chief, however, the Supreme Court today virtually rejected the move. Justice Nisar who was part of the three-judge panel said in Pakistan's political setup, political parties are personality driven. The previous election bill barred from office someone disqualified under Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution, which was used by the courts to remove Sharif. Experts and PML-N party members who have keenly followed the events over the past months are now awaiting Sharif's next move.

Person disqualified under Articles 62 and 63 cannot serve as party chief: Pak Supreme Court on ousted PM Sharif

The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday issued an arrest warrant against the former ambassador of Pakistan to the US, Husain Haqqani, over 2011 Memogate scandal, Pakistan media reported.&nbsp;

Reacting to the arrested warrant, Haqqani said it was said that the highest court of Pakistan persists with such antics for local TV news coverage.&nbsp;

&#39;&#39;Sad that highest court of Pakistan persists with such antics for local TV news coverage. Such political &lsquo;warrants&rsquo; have not been honoured abroad in the past, won&rsquo;t work now,&#39;&#39; Haqqani said.&nbsp;

According to Geo News, the warrants for former Pakistan People&#39;s Party leader were issued for violating his oath in which he had pledged to come back to face the trial, reported The News International.&nbsp;

During the hearing, Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Director General Bashir Memon told the court that a letter has been written to the Interpol in order to get a red warrant issued against Haqqani.

The Supreme Court had formed a three-member bench to hear the case which made headlines during the last stint of the PPP.

Haqqani was accused of seeking US &nbsp; action against Pakistan&#39;s military through the so-called memo months after the US raid in Abbottabad in 2011 on Osama Bin Laden compound amid increasing rift between civilian and military leadership.

Haqqani was accused of seeking US action against Pakistan's military

The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday issued an arrest warrant against the former ambassador of Pakistan to the US, Husain Haqqani, over 2011 Memogate scandal, Pakistan media reported. Reacting to the arrested warrant, Haqqani said it was said that the highest court of Pakistan persists with such antics for local TV news coverage. ''Sad that highest court of Pakistan persists with such antics for local TV news coverage. Such political ‘warrants’ have not been honoured abroad in the past, won’t work now,'' Haqqani said. According to Geo News, the warrants for former Pakistan People's Party leader were issued for violating his oath in which he had pledged to come back to face the trial, reported The News International. During the hearing, Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Director General Bashir Memon told the court that a letter has been written to the Interpol in order to get a red warrant issued against Haqqani. The Supreme Court had formed a three-member bench to hear the case which made headlines during the last stint of the PPP. Haqqani was accused of seeking US action against Pakistan's military through the so-called memo months after the US raid in Abbottabad in 2011 on Osama Bin Laden compound amid increasing rift between civilian and military leadership.

Pakistan SC issues arrest warrant against former ambassador to US

Pakistan&#39;s Supreme Court has given a 72-hour deadline to police to arrest the culprit behind the rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl.

A special bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar, held the hearing of the case at the Lahore registry, reported Geo News.

Chief Justice Nisar had taken suo motu notice of the case on January 10.

The minor, who was a resident of the Kasur district of Pakistan`s Punjab province, was kidnapped on her way to a tuition centre on January 4 from Kasur`s Kot Road area.

Five days after her disappearance, she was found raped, dead and buried in a garbage dump on Jan 9 near the Kashmir Chowk.

According to the initial post-mortem report, the minor was strangled to death after being raped multiple times.

As per the autopsy, the girl had marks of torture on nose, neck, and other parts of the body, the report said.

Hundreds of enraged protestors clashed with the police in Kasur last week over this incident.

The Punjab administration had then said that six personnel, including four policemen and two civil defence personnel, were arrested for allegedly opening fire at the mob.

Kasur made international headlines in 2015 when a gang of paedophiles running a child sex ring was busted.The court observed that had the police been serious since 2015, so many cases would not have occurred.

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar had taken suo motu notice of the case on January 10

Pakistan's Supreme Court has given a 72-hour deadline to police to arrest the culprit behind the rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl. A special bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar, held the hearing of the case at the Lahore registry, reported Geo News. Chief Justice Nisar had taken suo motu notice of the case on January 10. The minor, who was a resident of the Kasur district of Pakistan`s Punjab province, was kidnapped on her way to a tuition centre on January 4 from Kasur`s Kot Road area. Five days after her disappearance, she was found raped, dead and buried in a garbage dump on Jan 9 near the Kashmir Chowk. According to the initial post-mortem report, the minor was strangled to death after being raped multiple times. As per the autopsy, the girl had marks of torture on nose, neck, and other parts of the body, the report said. Hundreds of enraged protestors clashed with the police in Kasur last week over this incident. The Punjab administration had then said that six personnel, including four policemen and two civil defence personnel, were arrested for allegedly opening fire at the mob. Kasur made international headlines in 2015 when a gang of paedophiles running a child sex ring was busted.The court observed that had the police been serious since 2015, so many cases would not have occurred.

Minor girl's rape, murder: Pakistan SC gives police 72 hours to catch culprit

Pakistan&#39;s ousted<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/accountability-case-hearing-against-nawaz-sharif-family-adjourned-23429"> prime minister Nawaz Sharif along</a> with his family members appeared before the court in the corruption case levelled against them.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/now-pak-court-indicts-nawaz-sharif-in-offshore-investments-case-22665">Nawaz Sharif was accompanied</a> by his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Muhammad Safdar to contest the corruption case filed by the National Accountability Bureau(NAB).

The Pakistan prime minister was accompanied by several PML-N party leaders.&nbsp;

The NAB has filed cases against the Sharif family in three cases - Flagship Investment Ltd, London properties case, Al-Azizia Company and Hill Metal Establishment.&nbsp;

Nawaz Sharif, who was forced out by the Supreme Court in July following a corruption investigation against him in the Panama Papers leak case. The court had issued an arrest warrant against him for failing to appear at hearings since early October.

The ex-prime minister had spent several months in London with his wife who is receiving treatment for cancer.

The court had indicted Nawaz Sharif in all three cases. Sharif pleaded not guilty to all charges against him.

Nawaz Sharif was accompanied by his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Muhammad Safdar

Pakistan's ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif along with his family members appeared before the court in the corruption case levelled against them. Nawaz Sharif was accompanied by his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Muhammad Safdar to contest the corruption case filed by the National Accountability Bureau(NAB). The Pakistan prime minister was accompanied by several PML-N party leaders. The NAB has filed cases against the Sharif family in three cases - Flagship Investment Ltd, London properties case, Al-Azizia Company and Hill Metal Establishment. Nawaz Sharif, who was forced out by the Supreme Court in July following a corruption investigation against him in the Panama Papers leak case. The court had issued an arrest warrant against him for failing to appear at hearings since early October. The ex-prime minister had spent several months in London with his wife who is receiving treatment for cancer. The court had indicted Nawaz Sharif in all three cases. Sharif pleaded not guilty to all charges against him.

Nawaz Sharif appears in Pak court in corruption case

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has begun fresh investigations to prepare four references against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif&#39;s family in accordance with the July 28 Supreme Court verdict for his disqualification.

The National Accountability Bureau,the country&#39;s apex anti-corruption organisation has been given six- week deadline to finalise Nawaz Sharif, his children Hassan, Hussain and Maryam Nawaz corruption cases.But it may take longer time to submit admissible evidence before the court along with the prosecution witnesses to prove the cases in addition to relying on the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report in the Panama Papers case.

A NAB official said that if the bureau did not rely on the JIT report and went for fresh investigations, it might not use some evidence brought by the team before the Supreme Court in its 60-day proceedings, the Dawn reported.

According to him, the JIT, because of a time constraint, had collected certain documents, about the &#39;money trail&#39; and foreign companies owned by the Sharif family, directly and through experts and they had been accorded weight by the Supreme Court.

The NAB Executive Board approved in its meeting on July 31 the filing of the references related to the apartments in London and steel mills in Saudi Arabia of the Sharif family, companies owned by the children of the former premier and possession by finance minister Ishaq Dar of assets beyond his known sources of income.

The sources said that NAB&#39;s Lahore directorate was working on a reference about flats 16, 16-A, 17 and 17-A at Avenfield House, Park Lane, London, that would be filed against Sharif, his daughter Maryam and sons Hassan and Hussain Nawaz and son-in-law retired Capt Mohammad Safdar, the Dawn reported.

The court had observed that they had failed to prove themselves innocent before the JIT with regard to the ownership of offshore companies and assets which allegedly were disproportionate to their declared sources of income.

The bureau&#39;s Lahore directorate will also hold investigations against Hussain , Hassan and Maryam Nawaz with regard to the setting up of the companies mentioned in Paragraph 9 of the court&#39;s judgement - Flagship Investments, Hartstone Proper&shy;ties, Que Holdings, Quint Eaton Place 2, Quint Saloane (formerly Quint Eaton Place Limited), Quaint Limited, Flagship Securities, Quint Gloucester Place, Quint Paddington (formerly Rivates Estates Limited), Flagship Developments, Alanna Services in British Virgin Islands, Lankin SA (BVI), Chadron Inc, Ansbacher, Coomber and Capital Free Zone Establishment (Dubai).

The Rawalpindi directorate will file a reference regarding the setting up of Azizia Steel Company and Hill Metal Establishment against Mr Sharif and his sons.

The same directorate may prepare the reference against Mr Dar for possessing assets beyond his known sources of income.

The National Accountability Bureau has been given a six-week deadline to finalise Nawaz Sharif, his children Hassan, Hussain and Maryam Nawaz corruption cases

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has begun fresh investigations to prepare four references against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif's family in accordance with the July 28 Supreme Court verdict for his disqualification. The National Accountability Bureau,the country's apex anti-corruption organisation has been given six- week deadline to finalise Nawaz Sharif, his children Hassan, Hussain and Maryam Nawaz corruption cases.But it may take longer time to submit admissible evidence before the court along with the prosecution witnesses to prove the cases in addition to relying on the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) report in the Panama Papers case. A NAB official said that if the bureau did not rely on the JIT report and went for fresh investigations, it might not use some evidence brought by the team before the Supreme Court in its 60-day proceedings, the Dawn reported. According to him, the JIT, because of a time constraint, had collected certain documents, about the 'money trail' and foreign companies owned by the Sharif family, directly and through experts and they had been accorded weight by the Supreme Court. The NAB Executive Board approved in its meeting on July 31 the filing of the references related to the apartments in London and steel mills in Saudi Arabia of the Sharif family, companies owned by the children of the former premier and possession by finance minister Ishaq Dar of assets beyond his known sources of income. The sources said that NAB's Lahore directorate was working on a reference about flats 16, 16-A, 17 and 17-A at Avenfield House, Park Lane, London, that would be filed against Sharif, his daughter Maryam and sons Hassan and Hussain Nawaz and son-in-law retired Capt Mohammad Safdar, the Dawn reported. The court had observed that they had failed to prove themselves innocent before the JIT with regard to the ownership of offshore companies and assets which allegedly were disproportionate to their declared sources of income. The bureau's Lahore directorate will also hold investigations against Hussain , Hassan and Maryam Nawaz with regard to the setting up of the companies mentioned in Paragraph 9 of the court's judgement - Flagship Investments, Hartstone Properties, Que Holdings, Quint Eaton Place 2, Quint Saloane (formerly Quint Eaton Place Limited), Quaint Limited, Flagship Securities, Quint Gloucester Place, Quint Paddington (formerly Rivates Estates Limited), Flagship Developments, Alanna Services in British Virgin Islands, Lankin SA (BVI), Chadron Inc, Ansbacher, Coomber and Capital Free Zone Establishment (Dubai). The Rawalpindi directorate will file a reference regarding the setting up of Azizia Steel Company and Hill Metal Establishment against Mr Sharif and his sons. The same directorate may prepare the reference against Mr Dar for possessing assets beyond his known sources of income.

Pakistan: NAB directorates initiate fresh probes against Sharif family

Pakistan&#39;s Opposition Tehreek-e- Insaf party on Friday welcomed the Supreme Court&#39;s unanimous decision to disqualify Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, describing it an end to &quot;godfather&#39;s rule&quot;.

Other Opposition party politicians also gave all the credit to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) led by cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan for the legal victory.

The top court had taken up the case in October last year on petitions filed by Imran&#39;s party, Awami Muslim League and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI).

&quot;Godfather&#39;s rule has ended for good! Truth &amp; Justice have prevailed!,&quot; the party tweeted.

&quot;Godfather&#39;s ally, the Finance Minister Ishaq Dar has been disqualified in Panamagate Case!,&quot; it added.

The party&#39;s vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi while addressing the press soon after the judgement, said: &quot;It?s a historic day, let&#39;s strengthen Pakistan, let&#39;s get rid of terrorism from the country.

&quot;Let us take this moment to express gratitude to the armed forces, police and other law enforcement agencies. We should also thank the JIT members for not succumbing to the enormous pressure and serving the cause of justice,&quot; he added.

Pakistan People&#39;s Party leader Zaman Kaira praised Imran fro taking the case to the court.

&quot;The judgement came it was expected. It was on the cards for long. All the opposition parties played their part in this, but the credit does go to PTI and Imran Khan for taking this issue to court and fighting this long legal battle.&quot;

JI&#39;s Siraj ul Haq congratulated the apex court, journalists, lawyers and political workers.

Sharif today resigned as Pakistan Prime Minister after the Supreme Court disqualified him from holding public office and ruled that graft cases be filed against the beleaguered leader and his children over the Panama Papers scandal.

Sharif today resigned as Pakistan Prime Minister after the Supreme Court disqualified him from holding public office and ruled that graft cases be filed against the beleaguered leader and his children over the Panama Papers scandal

Pakistan's Opposition Tehreek-e- Insaf party on Friday welcomed the Supreme Court's unanimous decision to disqualify Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, describing it an end to "godfather's rule". Other Opposition party politicians also gave all the credit to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) led by cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan for the legal victory. The top court had taken up the case in October last year on petitions filed by Imran's party, Awami Muslim League and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). "Godfather's rule has ended for good! Truth & Justice have prevailed!," the party tweeted. "Godfather's ally, the Finance Minister Ishaq Dar has been disqualified in Panamagate Case!," it added. The party's vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi while addressing the press soon after the judgement, said: "It?s a historic day, let's strengthen Pakistan, let's get rid of terrorism from the country. "Let us take this moment to express gratitude to the armed forces, police and other law enforcement agencies. We should also thank the JIT members for not succumbing to the enormous pressure and serving the cause of justice," he added. Pakistan People's Party leader Zaman Kaira praised Imran fro taking the case to the court. "The judgement came it was expected. It was on the cards for long. All the opposition parties played their part in this, but the credit does go to PTI and Imran Khan for taking this issue to court and fighting this long legal battle." JI's Siraj ul Haq congratulated the apex court, journalists, lawyers and political workers. Sharif today resigned as Pakistan Prime Minister after the Supreme Court disqualified him from holding public office and ruled that graft cases be filed against the beleaguered leader and his children over the Panama Papers scandal.

Pakistan: Tehreek-e- Insaf party celebrates Nawaz Sharif's dismissal, calls it end to 'godfather's rule'

Pakistan&#39;s Supreme Court on Friday disqualified Finance Minister Ishaq Dar from office after an investigation into the wealth of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, state-run PTV news channel said.

The court also disqualified Sharif from office after an investigative panel alleged his family could not account for its vast wealth.

Ishaq Dar, who was Sharif&#39;s former accountant, had submitted documents to the Supreme Court about how the Sharif family obtained their wealth that included a portfolio of upscale London properties.

Dar has been considered one of the most influential people in Sharif&#39;s cabinet and credited with bringing the economy on to a more sure footing after the 2013 balance of payments crisis.

The court also disqualified Nawaz Sharif from office after an investigative panel alleged his family could not account for its vast wealth

Pakistan's Supreme Court on Friday disqualified Finance Minister Ishaq Dar from office after an investigation into the wealth of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, state-run PTV news channel said. The court also disqualified Sharif from office after an investigative panel alleged his family could not account for its vast wealth. Ishaq Dar, who was Sharif's former accountant, had submitted documents to the Supreme Court about how the Sharif family obtained their wealth that included a portfolio of upscale London properties. Dar has been considered one of the most influential people in Sharif's cabinet and credited with bringing the economy on to a more sure footing after the 2013 balance of payments crisis.

Pakistan's Supreme Court also disqualifies finance minister

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) have threatened to launch a countrywide movement if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif doesn&#39;t resign in seven days.

In a joint declaration issued by the two bar associations, they said that following the Supreme Court&#39;s order on the Panama Papers case, the Prime Minister should no longer hold the position and resign within seven days, The Dawn reported.

&quot;For fair and independent inquiry against the premier, Nawaz Sharif should step down till the final report of the JIT. In case he does not resign till May 27, the lawyers throughout Pakistan will launch nationwide campaign and moment to ensure the resignation,&quot; the statement said.

The notification came soon after SCBA and LHCBA members clashed, with the lawyers supporting the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML_N) government at the all Pakistan lawyers&#39; representatives&#39; convention on May 19.

The PML-N lawyers locked SCBA President Rasheed A Rizvi in the Lahore High Court&#39;s library. During the ruckus, the locks were broken by SCBA members and Rizvi was released.

Rizvi, who was accompanied by Secretary SCBA Aftab Bajwa and LHCBA President Zulfiqar Chaudhry, asserted that the convention would be held under any circumstances.The PML-N&#39;s Lawyers Wing representatives argued that the Panama Papers case was still sub judice and that was why demands for the prime minister`s resignation at this point was not appropriate.Earlier in April, the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) had given a similar ultimatum to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The bar association had asked the premier to resign within a week, or face a lawyers` movement bigger than the one that followed ex-chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry&#39;s ouster.

Pakistan&#39;s top court has ordered the formation of a Joint Investigating Team to probe the Panama Papers leak which reveal that Nawaz Sharif lied about the investments made by his children in offshore companies. 
 
(ANI)

The Supreme Court Bar Association and the Lahore High Court Bar Association have threatened to launch a countrywide movement if Sharif doesn't resign

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) have threatened to launch a countrywide movement if Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif doesn't resign in seven days. In a joint declaration issued by the two bar associations, they said that following the Supreme Court's order on the Panama Papers case, the Prime Minister should no longer hold the position and resign within seven days, The Dawn reported. "For fair and independent inquiry against the premier, Nawaz Sharif should step down till the final report of the JIT. In case he does not resign till May 27, the lawyers throughout Pakistan will launch nationwide campaign and moment to ensure the resignation," the statement said. The notification came soon after SCBA and LHCBA members clashed, with the lawyers supporting the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML_N) government at the all Pakistan lawyers' representatives' convention on May 19. The PML-N lawyers locked SCBA President Rasheed A Rizvi in the Lahore High Court's library. During the ruckus, the locks were broken by SCBA members and Rizvi was released. Rizvi, who was accompanied by Secretary SCBA Aftab Bajwa and LHCBA President Zulfiqar Chaudhry, asserted that the convention would be held under any circumstances.The PML-N's Lawyers Wing representatives argued that the Panama Papers case was still sub judice and that was why demands for the prime minister`s resignation at this point was not appropriate.Earlier in April, the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) had given a similar ultimatum to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The bar association had asked the premier to resign within a week, or face a lawyers` movement bigger than the one that followed ex-chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry's ouster. Pakistan's top court has ordered the formation of a Joint Investigating Team to probe the Panama Papers leak which reveal that Nawaz Sharif lied about the investments made by his children in offshore companies. (ANI)

Pakistan lawyers set 7-day deadline for PM Nawaz Sharif to resign

Pakistan Supreme Court today ordered a probe into the&nbsp;Panama Papers case. The court directed a five-member team to be formed to investigate the contents of the Panama Papers.

The joint investigation team(JIT) has been asked to submit the report within two weeks, according to WION sources. The court has directed Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif to appear before the investigation team which will look into the controversial Panama Papers.&nbsp;

Reports said the joint investigation team will consist of members of Pakistan&#39;s Inter-Services&nbsp;Intelligence(ISI).&nbsp;Even though the Pakistan prime minister was given a reprieve after the Supreme Court ordered an investigation into corruption allegations, but his fate still hangs in balance with the court deciding&nbsp;to form an investigation team.

&quot;A thorough investigation is required,&quot; Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said.

According to media reports, three judges said&nbsp;further investigation was needed in the case but two other judges wanted the Pakistan prime minister to be disqualified.

The highly-anticipated decision threatens to plunge Nawaz Sharif&#39;s governing party into turmoil ahead of general elections which is due to be held by next year even as security and the economy improve in the militancy-plagued country.

The controversy erupted with the publication of the so-called Panama Papers last year, 11.5 million secret documents from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca which documented the offshore dealings of many of the world&#39;s rich and powerful.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Whatever the verdict, am amazed &amp; humbled to see the overwhelming support for Nawaz Sharif. For a leader, that&#39;s the most prized possession.
&mdash; Maryam Nawaz Sharif (@MaryamNSharif) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaryamNSharif/status/854937661735411712">April 20, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Among the global elite implicated were three of Sharif&#39;s four children - his daughter and presumptive political heir Maryam, and his sons Hasan and Hussein.

At the heart of the matter is the legitimacy of the funds used by the Sharif family to purchase several high-end London properties via offshore companies.

Sharif&#39;s ruling PML-N party insists the wealth was acquired legally through family businesses in Pakistan and the Gulf.

But lawyers for Pakistani cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) party, argue the paper trail for the funds is non-existent, and say the onus is on Sharif to prove his relatives did not engage in money laundering.&nbsp;

The case has dominated headlines in Pakistan for the better part of a year.&nbsp;The court has taken such action before holding former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gilani in contempt in 2012 for refusing to re-open corruption investigations into then President Asif Ali Zardari, resulting in his disqualification.

The controversy is the latest to hit Sharif, an industrialist serving his third term as prime minister after the first two terms were interrupted by interventions from the country&#39;s powerful military.

Late Wednesday, he detailed his party&#39;s infrastructure achievements in televised comments at the inauguration of a power plant, without mentioning the looming verdict.

(WION with Agency inputs)

A five-member joint investigation team consisting of ISI members is set to probe Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif

Pakistan Supreme Court today ordered a probe into the Panama Papers case. The court directed a five-member team to be formed to investigate the contents of the Panama Papers. The joint investigation team(JIT) has been asked to submit the report within two weeks, according to WION sources. The court has directed Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif to appear before the investigation team which will look into the controversial Panama Papers. Reports said the joint investigation team will consist of members of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence(ISI). Even though the Pakistan prime minister was given a reprieve after the Supreme Court ordered an investigation into corruption allegations, but his fate still hangs in balance with the court deciding to form an investigation team. "A thorough investigation is required," Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said. According to media reports, three judges said further investigation was needed in the case but two other judges wanted the Pakistan prime minister to be disqualified. The highly-anticipated decision threatens to plunge Nawaz Sharif's governing party into turmoil ahead of general elections which is due to be held by next year even as security and the economy improve in the militancy-plagued country. The controversy erupted with the publication of the so-called Panama Papers last year, 11.5 million secret documents from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca which documented the offshore dealings of many of the world's rich and powerful. Whatever the verdict, am amazed & humbled to see the overwhelming support for Nawaz Sharif. For a leader, that's the most prized possession. — Maryam Nawaz Sharif (@MaryamNSharif) April 20, 2017 × Among the global elite implicated were three of Sharif's four children - his daughter and presumptive political heir Maryam, and his sons Hasan and Hussein. At the heart of the matter is the legitimacy of the funds used by the Sharif family to purchase several high-end London properties via offshore companies. Sharif's ruling PML-N party insists the wealth was acquired legally through family businesses in Pakistan and the Gulf. But lawyers for Pakistani cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) party, argue the paper trail for the funds is non-existent, and say the onus is on Sharif to prove his relatives did not engage in money laundering. The case has dominated headlines in Pakistan for the better part of a year. The court has taken such action before holding former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gilani in contempt in 2012 for refusing to re-open corruption investigations into then President Asif Ali Zardari, resulting in his disqualification. The controversy is the latest to hit Sharif, an industrialist serving his third term as prime minister after the first two terms were interrupted by interventions from the country's powerful military. Late Wednesday, he detailed his party's infrastructure achievements in televised comments at the inauguration of a power plant, without mentioning the looming verdict. (WION with Agency inputs)

Pakistan Supreme Court orders probe in Panama Papers case, Pak PM Nawaz Sharif under scanner

Pakistan&#39;s apex court today stayed the execution of the schizophrenic man convicted in 2002 for murdering a cleric, Pakistan daily, the Dawn, reported.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The hearing of the case will resume in the second week of November after the hanging was postponed on the basis of convict Imad Ali&#39;s mental illness.

&nbsp;

After Ali&#39;s wife submitted a review petition, the Supreme Court issued notices to Advocate General Punjab, Prosecutor General Punjab and Attorney General, seeking their comments on the issue, the daily reported.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

According to the daily, however, the SC had already rejected a plea as his lawyers said Ali is unfit to be executed since he is unable to understand his crime and punishment.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(WION)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The hearing of the case will resume in the second week of November

Pakistan's apex court today stayed the execution of the schizophrenic man convicted in 2002 for murdering a cleric, Pakistan daily, the Dawn, reported. The hearing of the case will resume in the second week of November after the hanging was postponed on the basis of convict Imad Ali's mental illness. After Ali's wife submitted a review petition, the Supreme Court issued notices to Advocate General Punjab, Prosecutor General Punjab and Attorney General, seeking their comments on the issue, the daily reported. According to the daily, however, the SC had already rejected a plea as his lawyers said Ali is unfit to be executed since he is unable to understand his crime and punishment. (WION)

Pakistan's top court stays hanging of mentally ill convict?

After Pakistan&#39;s Supreme Court ruled that schizophrenia is &quot;not a permanent mental disorder&quot; and cannot be held as a ground for staying an execution, the authorities on Wednesday issued a death warrant against a mentally ill condemned prisoner.&nbsp;

A criminal court on the request of the provincial Punjab government&nbsp;issued the death warrant for the convicted murderer, Imdad Ali. He will now be executed on November 2 in a prison in the city of Vehari, said the Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), which is providing Ali with counsel.&nbsp;

&quot;Imdad&rsquo;s hanging will signal to the world that Pakistan does not take its human rights commitments and treaty obligations seriously,&quot; said Sarah Belal, JPP executive director.

Lawyers and rights groups argued that Ali cannot be executed as he cannot understand his crime and punishment. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia while in prison in 2012. He has spent 14 years on death row, with three years in solitary confinement in the jail hospital due to his schizophrenia.&nbsp;

He had been sentenced to death for the murder of a religious cleric in 2002. Ali had received a last-minute stay of execution by the Supreme Court but the judgement expired last week, with the ruling that schizophrenia was a &quot;recoverable disease&quot; that could be treated by drugs, and not a mental disorder.

Rights groups have slammed the ruling, with Amnesty calling it &quot;a deeply worrying development&quot;. Maya Foa, a director of Reprieve, last week called the Supreme court ruling &quot;outrageous&quot; and said it flies in the face of accepted medical knowledge.

&quot;It is terrifying to think that a mentally ill man like Imdad Ali could now hang because judges are pretending that schizophrenia is not a serious condition,&quot; Foa said, demanding the Pakistan President&#39;s intervention.

Ali&#39;s counsel has already sent a mercy petition to President Mamnoon Hussain along with testimony from medical experts. It remains pending with his office since September 19.

The country had reinstated the death penalty and established military courts after suffering its deadliest-ever terrorist attack&nbsp;when gunmen stormed a school in the northwest in 2014 and killed more than 150 people, mostly children.

(WION with inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

Death warrant was issued for a schizophrenic prisoner as activists argued against the SC ruling that it is 'not a permanent mental illness'

After Pakistan's Supreme Court ruled that schizophrenia is "not a permanent mental disorder" and cannot be held as a ground for staying an execution, the authorities on Wednesday issued a death warrant against a mentally ill condemned prisoner. A criminal court on the request of the provincial Punjab government issued the death warrant for the convicted murderer, Imdad Ali. He will now be executed on November 2 in a prison in the city of Vehari, said the Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), which is providing Ali with counsel. "Imdad’s hanging will signal to the world that Pakistan does not take its human rights commitments and treaty obligations seriously," said Sarah Belal, JPP executive director. Lawyers and rights groups argued that Ali cannot be executed as he cannot understand his crime and punishment. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia while in prison in 2012. He has spent 14 years on death row, with three years in solitary confinement in the jail hospital due to his schizophrenia. He had been sentenced to death for the murder of a religious cleric in 2002. Ali had received a last-minute stay of execution by the Supreme Court but the judgement expired last week, with the ruling that schizophrenia was a "recoverable disease" that could be treated by drugs, and not a mental disorder. Rights groups have slammed the ruling, with Amnesty calling it "a deeply worrying development". Maya Foa, a director of Reprieve, last week called the Supreme court ruling "outrageous" and said it flies in the face of accepted medical knowledge. "It is terrifying to think that a mentally ill man like Imdad Ali could now hang because judges are pretending that schizophrenia is not a serious condition," Foa said, demanding the Pakistan President's intervention. Ali's counsel has already sent a mercy petition to President Mamnoon Hussain along with testimony from medical experts. It remains pending with his office since September 19. The country had reinstated the death penalty and established military courts after suffering its deadliest-ever terrorist attack when gunmen stormed a school in the northwest in 2014 and killed more than 150 people, mostly children. (WION with inputs from agencies)

Pakistani authorities issue execution orders for mentally ill prisoner

Asia Bibi&#39;s blasphemy case was adjourned by Pakistan&#39;s Supreme Court after&nbsp;a judge refused to hear her final plea, the Pakistani media reported.&nbsp;

It is not clear when the hearing will commence, Pakistani daily Dawn reported, after&nbsp;one of the three-member bench Justice Iqbal Hamid-ur-Rehman decided to recuse as he had also heard the Salmaan Taseer murder case.&nbsp;

Former Punjab governor Salman Taseer was gunned down in public for supporting Bibi&#39;s cause.

Hundreds of security personnel had been deployed in and around the court in Islamabad ahead of the landmark judgement.&nbsp;

Asia Bibi, a Christian, has been on death row since 2010 for apparently desecrating Prophet Muhammad, an allegation she denies.

Her lawyers are seeking to repeal her death&nbsp;sentence.

In 2010, while Bibi was working on a farm with Muslim women, an argument broke out over a cup of water. The women complained to a local cleric that Bibi had insulted the Prophet.

Bibi was charged with blasphemy.&nbsp;

Bibi&#39;s&nbsp;daughters now live in seclusion fearing attack from angry villagers, AFP reported.&nbsp;

Her relatives claim she was framed as some people held a personal grudge against her.

Her husband has also written to Pakistan President Mamnoon Hussain pleading for clemency and taking her to France, where she has been promised asylum.&nbsp;

If the verdict is in favour of Bibi, it could cause serious repercussions&nbsp;in the Muslim-majority country, as the hardliners in the country are demanding death for Bibi.&nbsp;

If Bibi is sentenced, she will be the first person to be legally executed for blasphemy, which will be a huge setback for minorities living in Pakistan, AFP reported.&nbsp;

Blasphemy is a serious offence in Pakistan and the maximum punishment is death.

Pakistan&#39;s blasphemy laws became &quot;Islamicised&quot; between 1980 and 1986 under General Zia-ul-Haq&#39;s regime. After partition, Pakistan adopted the law against religious offences set by the British in 1860. Zia&#39;s government added more clauses to the law, which include:&nbsp;

<ul>
	<li>&nbsp;In 1927, 295- A was added which stated remarks which outraged religious sentiments would receive imprisonment, which could be extended ten years and a fine.&nbsp;</li>
	<li>&nbsp;In 1982, 295-B was added for defiling or desecrating a copy of the Muslim holy book of Qur&#39;an, for which a person was given life imprisonment.&nbsp;</li>
	<li>&nbsp;In 1986, 295-C was included for insulting Prophet Muhammad.</li>
</ul>

(Source: <a href="http://www.pakistanblasphemylaw.com/?page_id=15">Pakistan Blasphemy Law</a>)

Between 1984 and 2004, 5,000 cases of blasphemy were registered and 964 people were charged and accused of blasphemy. Out of the 964 accused, 32 were killed by vigilantes.&nbsp;

Petitions have been signed to free Asia Bibi by people worldwide, which include &#39;Save Asia Bibi&#39; and &#39; A Call For Mercy&#39;. Benedict XVI, who became the first pope to resign in almost 600 years in 2013, also called for a&nbsp;pardon .&nbsp;

(WION)

 
&nbsp;

It is not clear when the hearing will commence after?one of the judges refused to hear Bibi's final plea

Asia Bibi's blasphemy case was adjourned by Pakistan's Supreme Court after a judge refused to hear her final plea, the Pakistani media reported. It is not clear when the hearing will commence, Pakistani daily Dawn reported, after one of the three-member bench Justice Iqbal Hamid-ur-Rehman decided to recuse as he had also heard the Salmaan Taseer murder case. Former Punjab governor Salman Taseer was gunned down in public for supporting Bibi's cause. Hundreds of security personnel had been deployed in and around the court in Islamabad ahead of the landmark judgement. Asia Bibi, a Christian, has been on death row since 2010 for apparently desecrating Prophet Muhammad, an allegation she denies. Her lawyers are seeking to repeal her death sentence. In 2010, while Bibi was working on a farm with Muslim women, an argument broke out over a cup of water. The women complained to a local cleric that Bibi had insulted the Prophet. Bibi was charged with blasphemy. Bibi's daughters now live in seclusion fearing attack from angry villagers, AFP reported. Her relatives claim she was framed as some people held a personal grudge against her. Her husband has also written to Pakistan President Mamnoon Hussain pleading for clemency and taking her to France, where she has been promised asylum. If the verdict is in favour of Bibi, it could cause serious repercussions in the Muslim-majority country, as the hardliners in the country are demanding death for Bibi. If Bibi is sentenced, she will be the first person to be legally executed for blasphemy, which will be a huge setback for minorities living in Pakistan, AFP reported. Blasphemy is a serious offence in Pakistan and the maximum punishment is death. Pakistan's blasphemy laws became "Islamicised" between 1980 and 1986 under General Zia-ul-Haq's regime. After partition, Pakistan adopted the law against religious offences set by the British in 1860. Zia's government added more clauses to the law, which include: In 1927, 295- A was added which stated remarks which outraged religious sentiments would receive imprisonment, which could be extended ten years and a fine. In 1982, 295-B was added for defiling or desecrating a copy of the Muslim holy book of Qur'an, for which a person was given life imprisonment. In 1986, 295-C was included for insulting Prophet Muhammad. (Source: Pakistan Blasphemy Law) Between 1984 and 2004, 5,000 cases of blasphemy were registered and 964 people were charged and accused of blasphemy. Out of the 964 accused, 32 were killed by vigilantes. Petitions have been signed to free Asia Bibi by people worldwide, which include 'Save Asia Bibi' and ' A Call For Mercy'. Benedict XVI, who became the first pope to resign in almost 600 years in 2013, also called for a pardon . (WION)

Pakistan: Asia Bibi blasphemy case adjourned by top court

Pakistan&#39;s Supreme Court has reportedly taken a grim view of media-related reports that claim that close to 600 children have been victims of abduction in the country&#39;s Punjab province. 
 
Acting Supreme Court Chief Justice, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, has reportedly taken suo moto notice of these media reports regarding the abduction of 600 children in Punjab, approximately 300 of them from Lahore alone, reports Samaa TV. 
 
Justice Nisar last month ordered issuance of notice to the inspector general of police of Punjab to present details before the apex court&#39;s Lahore registry on July 28. 
 
&quot;Such large-scale abduction of children in a short span of time is a matter of immense concern and alarm,&quot; he was quoted, as saying.&nbsp; 
 
(ANI) 
&nbsp;

Close to 600 children have been victims of abduction in the Pakistan's Punjab province, approximately 300 of them from Lahore alone

Pakistan's Supreme Court has reportedly taken a grim view of media-related reports that claim that close to 600 children have been victims of abduction in the country's Punjab province. Acting Supreme Court Chief Justice, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, has reportedly taken suo moto notice of these media reports regarding the abduction of 600 children in Punjab, approximately 300 of them from Lahore alone, reports Samaa TV. Justice Nisar last month ordered issuance of notice to the inspector general of police of Punjab to present details before the apex court's Lahore registry on July 28. "Such large-scale abduction of children in a short span of time is a matter of immense concern and alarm," he was quoted, as saying. (ANI)

Pakistan Supreme Court alarmed by large-scale abduction of children in Punjab province

pakistan-supreme-court

Pakistan Supreme Court, News on Pakistan Supreme Court, stories on Pakistan Supreme Court, articles on Pakistan Supreme Court, Pakistan Supreme Court stories at Wion, Pakistan Supreme Court news, Pakistan Supreme Court latest news

pakistan supreme-court