Law Minister Farooq Naek has stated that as the appointment of the present Chief Justice has been authenticated by the Supreme Court, he is the constitutional C J of the country and cannot be replaced by the deposed Iftikhar Chaudhry. The law minister is either ignorant of the law or considers others ignorant. Virtually all prominent jurists of the country agree that a PCO, and actions that caused its issue, can only become constitutional if it is validated by the parliament with two-thirds majority as required by article 238 of the constitution. Musharraf's November 3 actions, which also include appointment of the present CJ, are yet to be validated by the parliament and are, hence, not a part of the constitution as of now. In such a situation, one may ask, on what basis has the Law Minister called the sitting CJ as constitutional? Isn't this ridiculous? -ANWAR JALAL, Peshawar, via e-mail, September 2.