sahulatkar vs lifafa

PTI activists protest on a street against the decision to disqualify former Prime Minister Imran Khan in Karachi. AFP/File

If you talk to a PTI supporter, you will find him convinced that the journalists who criticize Imran Khan are Lifafa journalists who receive money to oppose the PTI. Being passionate supporters of Imran Khan, they honestly do not see how anyone fair and honest can criticize or criticize their leader.

These days, we also see the PML-N and establishment supporters claiming that the judges who rule in favour of Imran Khan must be sahulatkar judges. For them, it is impossible for a judge who gives a judgment they disapprove of to follow the law and not favour the PTI.

As the learned columnist Abbas Nasir wrote a few days ago: The establishment, for its part, believes that the prosecution of the former prime minister is foolproof. The establishment seems to believe that some members of the higher courts are deciding cases not on merits but on the basis of a sense of weakness for the PTI leader. Some judges have said that immense pressure is being exerted on them by the security services because their judgments are based on the evidence before them and are strictly in accordance with the law and the Constitution, and not what the establishment wants.

The problem is that those who call journalists Lifafas or judges Sahulatkars are not even willing to consider the possibility that journalists or judges who come to a different conclusion from them may do so sincerely or in good faith. Their thinking does not allow for different perspectives or gray areas.

Before becoming a judge, Justice Babar Sattar regularly wrote a column for this newspaper and was an analyst on television. He was critical of all politicians and was never particularly fond of Imran Khan. In fact, when he was first appointed by the then Chief Justice of the IHC, Ather Minallah, the then Prime Minister Imran Khan had instructed his intelligence bureau to malign and oppose Justice Sattar. However, this attempt to prevent him from becoming a judge did not succeed; many politicians and jurists argued at the time that Justice Babar would be the kind of judge who would rule according to the law and not according to political preferences.

When NAB sought to arrest me in a false case during Imran Khan’s rule, it was Justice Athar Minallah who rejected my bail application and sent me to jail. And five months later, it was he who granted me bail again. But I have no problem with him because both times he followed the NAB law and the Supreme Court precedent. The fault was entirely that of a malicious NAB for presenting a patently false case against Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and me and using this unjust law to persecute us.

Impartial judges do not and should not have the luxury of deciding cases according to their likes or dislikes or whether they privately believe a person is guilty or not. They must decide according to the strength of the arguments presented to them and according to the law. Getting a decision against your will does not necessarily make a judge unfair. The law or case may not warrant the judgment sought.

This does not mean that judges always act within the law. Legal scholars agree that Chief Justice Munir's judgment in the Maulvi Tameezuddin Khan case, which approved the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by the then Governor General Ghulam Mohammad in 1954, was a extremely selective and erroneous application of the law. Likewise, as the Supreme Court recently declared, the decision that sentenced Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to death was a serious miscarriage of justice.

Unfortunately, we have not learned from the past. Many judges seem to continue to make decisions based on their own preferences. In recent years, we have seen our Supreme Court decide to disqualify Mian Nawaz Sharif on a fabricated technicality, not count the votes of lawmakers against the will of their party leader, essentially ignoring the written text of the constitution and finally in a judgment to endorse the ECP’s decision not to grant a symbol to the PTI when no other party had held internal elections.

Such court judgments obviously do not inspire public confidence. Perhaps this is why, even when impartial judges render fair decisions, the aggrieved party is quick to claim bias and refuse to address the weaknesses in his or her case.

Psychologists say people typically first decide which political leader to support and only then present arguments to support that decision. The order is therefore reversed from what we usually believe: people support a political leader based on the arguments they find convincing. It turns out that people only find credible arguments that agree with their preconceived ideas and preferences.

One example is voters' selective opposition to the corruption they see and oppose only when it is committed by leaders they oppose.

A PML-N supporter is likely to focus on Farah Gogi sahiba who allegedly accepted money for transfers and postings in Punjab. And about the expensive diamond ring she allegedly demanded for the wife of the then Prime Minister, Bushra Bibi. Or the land transferred to a university fund owned by the three, allegedly in exchange for a direct financial benefit from the government. For PML-N supporters, the recording revealing the demand for a diamond ring or the transfer of the land and the granting of a financial benefit is sufficient proof. But PTI supporters will not dwell on this argument.

PTI supporters, on the other hand, will focus on a plethora of rumours and stories of alleged corruption in Sindh that we have been hearing for years, rumours that the PPP no longer even bothers to deny. Or they will focus on the alleged inability of the PML-N leadership to produce a financial trail of their assets abroad or of the money repatriated to Pakistan.

For a PTI supporter, it is obvious that money sent from abroad to an employee's account is at least tax evasion, if not worse. And for a PML-N supporter, the donation of land and the granting of financial benefits is clearly a matter of corruption.

But can courts decide these cases based on rumor or presumption? If a recording is presented in court, a natural first question is: where did the recording come from? Similarly, in the land transfer for financial advantage case, they are yet to see the prosecution establish that the financial advantage was actually given by the beneficiaries of the land transfer as part of a quid pro quo agreement. White-collar crime is never easy to prove.

Our laws and the constitution do not allow impartial judges the luxury of deciding cases based on hearsay or stories (however credible), or unproven audio recordings. They need solid evidence. We must understand that what we may consider morally wrong is not necessarily legally wrong. Therefore, before we are ready to label a judge a sahulatkar, we must ask ourselves: has he presented a legally sound case?

In a society as politically polarized as ours, if a judge rules in favor of one political party, he is called a sahulatkar and if he rules in favor of another, he is called a tout. Why can't partisans on all sides recognize the possibility of the existence of judges who rule according to the law? They do exist. Justice Babar Sattar is one of them.

Our institutions are working today at cross purposes. It's time to lower the temperature and harmonize the system. I hope that mature people are working behind the scenes to bring about harmony. Our 240 million people deserve nothing less.

The author is an economist and politician. He tweets/posts at @MiftahIsmail

Sources 1/ https://Google.com/ 2/ https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1204575-sahulatkar-vs-lifafa The mention sources can contact us to remove/changing this article

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos