Thursday, March 3, 2011
Islamabad tonight – 3rd march 2011
ISLAMABAD TONIGHT
WITH NADEEM MALIK
02-03-2011
TOPIC- ASSASSINATION OF SHAHBAZ BHATTI
GUESTS- IMTIAZ SAFDAR WARRAICH, SIRAJ UL HAQ, ORYA MAQBOOL JAN
IMTIAZ SAFDAR WARRAICH OF PPPP said that Islam does not allow killing any body for no reason. He said that if some body commits a crime he should by tried in the court of justice. He said that it is the duty of agencies to curtail terrorism but their resources are limited. He said that society needs to be on the side of the government to encounter terrorism.
SIRAJ UL HAQ OF JI said that in India if an incident take place the minister of the concerned ministry resigns. He said that in Pakistan there is no tradition to take responsibility and resign. He said that it is quite possible that the murderers of Shahbaz Bhatti are hiding in the American embassy. He said that in Balochistan government agencies are killing people every day. He said that if the government will not act in a responsible way more incidents like Shahbaz Bhatti assassination can take place. He said that people are treating Mumtaz Qadri like a hero. He said that 25 thousand people put bouquet in front of Mumtaz Qadri house to honor him. He said that three hundred lawyers offered to fight Mumtaz Qadri case for free. He said that the current government hit the house of one of the MNA in Bajorr agency with bomb which completely destroyed his house. He said that the murder of poor or rich should be treated equally. He said that the government of Pakistan should quit American war against terrorism. He said that quitting so called war against terrorism will normalize peace situation in Pakistan. He said that as long government will not put aside political interest things can not improve in Pakistan for betterment.
ORYA MAQBOOL JAN A POLITICAL ANALYST said that we do not learn lesson from history or the experiments of other countries. He said that in British rule religious sects used to announce edicts against each other but they never let them fight. He said that politically influenced appointments of police officers should be stopped right away to make sure peace in the country. He said that we discuss incidents but we never try to change the system. He said that now time has come to sit down and ponder a serious policy to handle the precarious situation of the country.-
Islamabad Tonight – 3rd March 2011
Rubina Qaim Khani PPP, Khuram Dastagir Khan PML-N, Haroon Akhter of PML and Waseem Akhter MQM in Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik
ہمیں پانچ چھ سال پہلے علم تھا کہ ملک میں گیس کی کمی ہو جائے گی۔ہارون اختر خان کی اسلام آباد ٹونائٹ میں گفتگو
ہم نے علم ہونے کے باوجود گیس کی کمی کا کوئی بندوبست نہیں کیا۔ہارون اختر خان
ایران کے ساتھ گیس کا معاہدہ کیا گیا لیکن بہت دیر کے ساتھ۔ہارون اختر خان
دنیا میں سب سے سستی بجلی نیوکلیر پاور سے بنتی ہے جو ہمارے پاس نہیں ہے۔ہارون اختر خان
ہم شمسی توانائی سے فائدہ اٹھا سکتے ہیں لیکن کچھ نہیں کیا گیا۔ہارون اختر خان
مہنگائی کو بہانہ بنا کر لوگوں کو حکومت کے خلاف بھڑکایا جا رہا ہے۔روبینہ قائم خوانی
تین سال ہو گئے ہیں لیکن حکومت کی طرف سے سنجیدگی کا مظاہرہ نہیں ہو رہا۔خرم دستگیر
حکومت کو نیوکلیر انرجی پر سنجیدگی سے غور کرنے کی ضرورت ہے۔خرم دستگیر
رینٹل پاور پراجیکٹس ملک کے لیے ایک بیماری کے سوا کچھ نہیں ہیں۔خرم دستگیر
نعرے لگا کر حکومت میں آ جاتے ہیں لیکن حکومت چلانے کے لیے اہل لوگ نہیں ہوتے۔ہارون اختر خان
میں تسلیم کرتی ہوں کہ سیاست دان ٹھیک طرح تربیت یافتہ نہیں ہوتے۔روبینہ قائم خوانی
دو بڑی جماعتوں نے ملک کے لیے کچھ نہیں کیا اور وہ خود اسے تسلیم کرتی ہیں۔وسیم اختر
ہمارے انقلاب سے مراد ملک میں خون خرابہ ہر گز نہیں ہے۔وسیم اختر
لوگ اب تیسری سیاسی قوت کی طرف دیکھ رہے ہیں۔وسیم اختر
ایم کیو ایم چھ بار حکومت میں رہی ہے ملکی مسائل کی کچھ زمہ داری تو اسے بھی قبول کرنی چاہیے۔خرم دستگیر
ایم کیو ایم پاکستان میں انقلاب چاہتی ہے لیکن کراچی میں نہیں کیونکہ وہاں ان کی اجارہ داری ہے۔خرم دستگیر
آج ملک میں جو کچھ ہو رہا ہے اس کے زمہ دار ڈکٹیٹرز ہیں۔روبینہ قائم خوانی
ہمیں خونی نہیں بلکہ ملک کے نظام کو درست کرنے کے انقلاب کی بات کرنی چاہیے۔ہارون اختر خان
ایم کیو ایم حکومت میں تو رہی ہے لیکن اس کے پاس اختیارات کبھی نہیں رہے۔وسیم اختر
پاکستان میں فوج فیصلہ کرتی ہے کہ حکومت کرنے کی کس کی باری ہے۔وسیم اختر
آج بھی سیاست دان راتوں کو چھپ چھپ کر فوجیوں سے ملتے ہیں۔وسیم اختر
پچھلے تین سالوں میں کچھ اچھے کام بھی ہوئے ہیں لیکن معاشی طور پر بہت ابتری آئی ہے۔ہارون اختر
حکومت سیاسی قوتوں کو تو اکٹھا کرنے میں کامیاب رہی ملک کا نظام نہیں چلا سکی۔خرم دستگیر
مڈل کلاس کے پڑھے لکھے لوگ حکومت میں آیں گے تو حالات درست ہوں گے۔وسیم اختر
حکومت اس وقت پٹرول کی قیمتوں پر سبسڈی دینے کی پوزیشن میں نہیں ہے۔روبینہ قائم خوانی
مسلم لیگ ن کے پاس ملک چلانے کے لیے بہتر اور پڑھے لکھے لوگ موجود ہیں۔خرم دستگیر
پیسہ کمانا جرم نہیں ہے لیکن پیسے پر ٹیکس نہ دینا جرم ہے۔ہارون اختر
میاں نواز شریف ملک کے پہلے غیر جاگیردار وزیراعظم ہیں۔خرم دستگیر
ہم نے آر جی ایس ٹی اس لیے نہیں مانا کہ حکومت پہلے امیروں پر ٹیکس لگائے پھر غریبوں پر۔ہارون اختر خان
حکومت غریبوں کو سبسڈی نہ دے لیکن اپنی شاہ خرچیاں اور عیاشیاں بھی تو ختم کرے۔وسیم اختر
حکومت جرأت سے کام لے اور زراعت اور رئیل اسٹیٹ پر ٹیکس لگائے۔ہارون اختر خان
حکومت کی مانیٹری پالیسی بالکل فیل ہو چکی ہے۔ہارون اختر
جتنے الزامات پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کے لیڈروں پر لگائے جاتے ہیں اس کی کوئی اور مثال موجود نہیں ہے۔روبینہ قائم خوانی
اگر ہم ملک کو قیادت نہیں دے سکتے تو پھر ہمیں پارلیمنٹ میں رہنے کوئی حق نہیں ہے۔ہارون اختر خان
Inside the secret U.S.-Pakistan meeting in Oman
Posted By Josh Rogin 
Thursday, February 24, 2011 - 5:59 PM 
Share
A host of top U.S. military officials held a secret day-long meeting with Pakistan's top military officers on Tuesday in Oman to plot a course out of the diplomatic crisis that threatens the U.S.-Pakistan relationship.
The United States was represented by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. David Petraeus, commander of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), Adm. Eric Olson, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, and Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, commander of U.S. Central Command, Stars and Stripes reported. The Pakistani delegation included Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan's chief of army staff, and Maj. Gen. Javed Iqbal, director general of military operations.
The meeting was planned long ago and covered various aspects of the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, but a large portion was dedicated to the diplomatic crisis surrounding Raymond Davis, the CIA contractor who was arrested in Lahore, Pakistan, last month after fatally shooting two armed Pakistani men.
"Where do you go to think seriously and bring sanity to a maddening situation? Far from the madding crowd to a peaceful Omani luxury resort of course. So that's what the military leadership of the US and Pakistan did," wrote Gen. Jehangir Karamat in a read out of the meeting obtained byThe Cable and confirmed by a senior Pakistani official. Karamat is a former chief of Pakistan's army, and also served as Pakistan's ambassador to the United States from 2002 to 2004.
"The US had to point out that once beyond a tipping point the situation would be taken over by political forces that could not be controlled," Karamat wrote about the meeting, referring to thereported split between the CIA and the Pakistani Inter-services Intelligence (ISI) that erupted following the Davis shooting.
In Oman U.S. officials implored the Pakistani military to step up its involvement in the Davis case, following the Pakistani government's decision to pass the buck to the judicial system on adjudicating Davis' claim of diplomatic immunity. However, their concerns also went beyond this most recent diplomatic spat.
"[T]he US did not want the US-Pakistan relationship to go into a free fall under media and domestic pressures," Karamat wrote. "These considerations drove it to ask the [Pakistani] Generals to step in and do what the governments were failing to do-especially because the US military was at a critical stage in Afghanistan and Pakistan was the key to control and resolution."
"The militaries will now brief and guide their civilian masters and hopefully bring about a qualitative change in the US-Pakistan Relationship by arresting the downhill descent and moving it in the right direction."
A senior Pakistani official confirmed the accuracy of Karamat's analysis to The Cable. The official said that the Davis incident would hopefully now be put on a path toward resolution following a feeding frenzy in the Pakistani media, which has reported on rumors of an extensive network of CIA contract spies operating outside of the Pakistani government's or the ISI's knowledge.
"The idea is to find a solution whereby the Davis incident does not hijack the U.S.-Pakistan relationship," the official said. The most probable outcome, the official explained, is that Davis would be turned over to the United States, following a promise from the U.S. government to investigate the incident.
The United States would also compensate the families of the two Pakistani men killed by Davis, and a third man who died after two other U.S. embassy personnel ran him over while racing to the scene of the shooting. Negotiations between U.S. officials and the family members are already underway, the official said.
Shuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council, said that it was the responsibility of the Pakistani Foreign Ministry, led until recently by Shah Mahmood Qureshi, to resolve the Davis case. Qureshi was removed as Foreign Minister after reportedly refusing to go along with the government's plan to grant Davis immunity.
"It's really the Foreign Ministry's responsibility," said Nawaz, "But in the absence of action by the civilian government, if the military can help persuade them to resolve this matter and find the way, that's all for the better."
But once the Davis case is resolved, there's still much work to be done in repairing the relationship between the CIA and the ISI. The ISI is widely suspected of airing its anger with the CIA in both the Pakistani and U.S. media. The latest example was Wednesday's Associated Press story that featured a never-before released ISI "statement" that said the Davis case was putting the entire ISI-CIA relationship in jeopardy.
The CIA and the ISI are talking, the Pakistani official said, but the path toward reconciliation will be a long one.
"It's a spy game being played out in the media and the CIA has told the ISI to cut it out," the official said. "The relationship remains testy. But after the meeting between Mullen and Kayani the likelihood of some resolution has increased."
Inside the Pakistani government, the Davis case has exacerbated internal tensions between the civilian government, led by President Asif Ali Zardari, and the ISI. Pakistani news agencies have been reporting that the Pakistani embassy in Washington has approved hundreds of visas for American officials without proper vetting, increasing the ease with which covert CIA operatives could enter the country.
Pakistan's Ambassador to Washington Husain Haqqani has denied that any visas had been issued from his embassy without proper authorization. An analysis of Pakistani visas granted to U.S. government employees, conducted by the Pakistani government, shows there has been no significant increase in the number of visas issued since 2007.
Regardless, the gentlemen's agreement between the ISI and the CIA that the two organizations would keep each other informed on each other's actions in Pakistan has now broken down.
"It's a vicious circle. Davis was in Pakistan because Pakistan can't be trusted. But Davis getting caught has increased the mistrust," the Pakistani official said. "Their interests are no longer congruent. Eventually the ISI and the CIA will have to work out new rules of engagement."
MNA Marvi Memon Submits Constitutional Petition Against Article 63 A (1) (b) in Peshawar High Court
Peshawar, March 2, 2011: MNA Marvi Memon through her legal counsel Mr. Omer Farouk Adam filed a constitutional petition in the Peshawer High court today. SVP PML Intikhab Khan was a co- petitioner in the same.
The constitutional petition challenges Article 63 A (1)(b) of the 18th Amendment which defines disqualification of a parliamentarian when they: vote or abstain from voting in the House contrary to any direction issued by the Parliamentary Party on election of PM or CM, on a vote of confidence, on a Money bill or a Constitutional Bill.
The argument in the petition states that this Article of the 18th amendment in effect breaches the guaranteed fundamental rights, violates representative government and is in violation of Article 4, 14, 17, 19, 25, 55, 63(2), 66, 95, 127.
Ms Memon explained her motive for filing this petition in the following way: “Functional democracy is a dream we have yet to achieve in Pakistan. There is some legislation which takes us further from our dream and this Article is one such anti democracy law. As a first time parliamentarian who is eager to fix parliamentary democracy in Pakistan it is my duty not to be silent if my conscience is not satisfied. There were many issues with the 18th Amendment which I raised at the time on the floor of the house and its time to fix some of the critical ones now.”
Legal Counsel Mr Omer Farouk Adam stated at this occasion that there is a background behind the distortion of this Article through the various constitutional amendments in history. He said that the 14th Amendment in 1997 inserted Article 63A which accepted disqualification when there was violation of party constitution, code of conduct and declared policies. Through Article 62 A (2) it gave powers to the disciplinary committee of the party to decide the matter. This provision was deleted via LFO 2002 giving dictatorial powers to party head and also imposing unreasonable restrictions on a member’s freedom of speech. And the same was continued by the 18th Amendment.
Ms Memon stated that the LFO strengthened the anti floor crossing Article which was a good omen for Pakistan’s politics and this was positively maintained in the 18th Amendment. However, she regretted the deletion of Article 17 (4) of the LFO 2002 in the 18th Amendment and termed it anti democratic. Ms Memon stated that just like horse trading was unacceptable so was not holding intra party elections.
Mr. Omer Farouk Adam further stated that the 18th Amendment’s Article 63 A (1) b was counter productive for democratic legislation because it insisted on “any direction issued by the parliamentary party” versus the more democratic concept of party policy as determined by the entire party. He explained that the omission of a party disciplinary committee from the said Article was a further regression from earlier legislation on the same.
Mr. Omer Farouk Adam stated that this Article also violated the principle that a member had a right to complete his tenure in the Assembly unless it was lawfully terminated. He said that “any legislation which could be used as an instrument by a party head or political party to cut short a tenure of a member on pretext of violation of his direction would prima facie be regarded as a violation of fundamental rights.”
Ms Memon regretted that though the parliamentary committee for the 18th Constitutional Amendment had been entrusted with protecting fundamental human rights as defined in their criteria, this was not protected for which the constitutional committee members shared a large blame. They had infact misled the rest of parliament into signing off on certain anti-democratic Articles.
Ms Memon explained that the Article in question was serving more than its intended goal of floor crossing. She said that “It had crossed the limits by being used as a weapon to keep elected representatives of a political party hostage at the whims of the party head thereby robbing the MNA of their right to represent the electorate and to exercise their right of dissent or speech as a representative of their constituency.”
Ms Memon said that many times during the current parliamentary year she had felt her voice of conscience silenced when she could not take a stand against anti peoples Money Bill 2010 and constitutional amendments. She said she had objected to the introduction of this Article at the time of the 18th Amendment because she knew it would be used to encourage politicking versus truly serving as a voice of the people of Pakistan.
Ms Memon stated that: “To change the old politics into clean new politics the voice of conscience versus the voice of convenience is critical. There needs to be space for individuals to be able to take the right stands versus the politically expedient stands. There needs to be room for politics of morality versus politics of vested interest. And for that to happen the window of conscience which had historically been open needs to be re-opened and a regressive law needs to be struck down by the judiciary. I hope that where my institution has faltered the judiciary would rectify.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)