Look Who is talking?

LAHORE The PPPs love-lost for the restored judiciary, especially the Chief Justice of Pakistan, is quite a reality well-known to all, and it merits no secret that the partys leadership has never minced words about it. The recent help-seeking pleadings of the PPP bigwigs are apparently efforts at making the judiciary realise that it should balance-out its acts, instead of being specific in its assertions and verdicts, as per their perception. On Sunday, Federal Minister Law Babar Awan refurbished this idea when he disclosed that the President would request the Supreme Court for revisiting its almost three-decade old decision of sending Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to gallows. Taking cue from his federal boss, PPPs Deputy Parliamentary leader Shaukat Mahmood Basra on Monday on the floor of the Punjab Assembly, while asking for the same, wanted the superior judiciary to be proactive for the case of Shahbaz Sharifs disqualification 'an unconstitutional Chief Minister and Karachi-killings of May 12, 2007 (to him it was May 21). However, one cannot miss the much-awaited decision regarding Sharjeel Memon and Taj Haider from Sindh, and Basras brainwave, having less of a context in the PA proceedings. The question is: Are they really seeking help or telling the judiciary to act impartially sans selective justice and accountability? Beside demanding of the CJP to review ZABs death sentence, Basra asserted that the Bhutto was hanged and it was a judicial murder. On a Point of Order, Basra urgently wanted this since ZABs death anniversary was a few days away, and especially after it had been an established fact that the sentence was 'a judicial murder, the judiciary restored after PPPs and fellow countrymens sacrifices, must review it. To substantiate his point of view, he referred to one member of the much-criticised bench Dr Nasim Hassan Shahs statement 'we were under pressure. However, in order to make the cause have a more genuine look, he pleaded to the CJP for taking notice of ever-deteriorating law and order situation of Karachi. Then came his political punch, when he asked the Chief not to miss 'those who attacked the Supreme Court, which was a certain explicit allusion to the PML-N, which had been repeatedly accused of attacking the SC. Lastly, to make it further pinching for his political adversaries, he submitted his third case, Also finally decide the petition pending against the Punjab Chief Minister in connection with his disqualification. After the mention of revered PML-N leader Shahbaz Sharif, it became necessary for Law Minister Rana Sanaullah to repeat his previous assertions. It is heartening to see that they are now talking of a petition, instead of a stay order. If everything is supposed to be done by the CJP, what is the federal government, especially the presidency doing? he quizzed, while advising, The President should submit a reference if he (Zardari) has any objection to any old verdicts of the (SC) .