Accountability of the Higher Judiciary

  •                                   **Reminder**

    Justice Mian Saqib Nisar
    Supreme Judicial Council
    Supreme Court of Pakistan

    Subject: Complaint of misconduct against the Chief Justice of Lahore High
    Court under Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan

    Dear Sir,

    Please refer to the subject cited above pertaining to which my complaint dated 03.06.2017 was received in your office on 05.06.2017 (copy of both the complaint and the receipt attached).

    I have not yet received any official acknowledgement of my complaint from your office and the action, if any, you have taken on the complaint, which was a complaint of misconduct against Chief Justice of Lahore High Court, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

    It is to bring into your kind notice that all persons, whether they are government officials or judges, drawing salaries from the public exchequer are duty bound to respond to the members of public.

    You are, therefore, requested to respond to my complaint as per the dictates enshrined in Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan.


    Sincerely, Dated: 10.06.2017

    Dr Qaisar Rashid
    2-B, Ashrafia Park, Ferozepur Road, Lahore.
    Cell: 03364189087

  •                              **Original Complaint**

    Justice Mian Saqib Nisar
    Supreme Judicial Council
    Supreme Court of Pakistan

    Subject: Complaint of misconduct against the Chief Justice of Lahore High
    Court under Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan

    Dear Sir,

    Through this letter, I, Dr Qaisar Rashid, a member of public, bearing National Identity Card Number 35202-2878398-9 (copy attached as Annexure I), resident of 2-B, Ashrafia Park, Ferozepur Road, Lahore, invoke Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan by filing a written complaint of misconduct against Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court (LHC), Lahore.

    A brief background of the matter is that the Chairperson of Higher Education Commission (HEC), Dr Mukhtar Ahmed, was appointed on 16.04.2014 for the determinate tenure of four years, but through a Writ Petition 17393/2014 [Dr Qaisar Rashid vs. Federation of Pakistan] – which was Quo Warranto in nature – as a petitioner, I challenged the appointment on 18.06.2014.

    In due course of regular fixture for three years, the administration of the LHC kept on sending the case for hearing mostly to judges who were not holding the position of permanent judges. Secondly, the administration of the LHC kept on sending the case mostly to judges who had to join Double Bench (DB) and in order to do so they had to call off their courts around 11:30 am, without resuming the hearing afterward. In this way, the case was found fixed for hearing on the cause list but was not called for hearing for a final decision. The staff of the judges pronounced such cases as “left-over” and either used to give a new date of hearing or send the cases back to the administration for relisting before some other judge.

    For a better description, the rest of the complaint is divided into three parts.

    Part I

    This part discovers the policy of protectionism practiced by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

    a. On 08.06.2015, I wrote a letter addressed to the then Chief Justice of the LHC to invite his attention towards the “left-over” problem being faced (copy attached as Annexure II). In the said letter I wrote: “At this juncture, as a petitioner, I am clueless how to make the case heard … I consider the whole scenario a reflexion of the lapse in the functioning of the Lahore High Court which has failed to perform its executive functions both in terms of calling the case (to be heard and decided) and making the office of the attorney general answerable”. However, I received no response and the trend of “left-over” continued unabated.

    b. On 25.04.2017, I wrote the second letter addressed to the Chief Justice of the LHC (this time to Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah) and invited his attention towards the fact that about three years had been lapsed without any end of the case in sight [against the four year tenure of the Chairperson HEC] (copy attached as Annexure III). In this letter, I also wrote: “Now, we are in 2017 and I have a right to ask you to kindly provide me the disposal schedule for the said Writ Petition [before it gets infructuous]. I have paid my [three] lawyers in full and have attended all hearings including today at the court of Justice Mudassir Khalid Abbasi.”

    c. On 26.04.2017, I received a phone call on my cell number (03364189087) from someone’s cell number (03004900902) enquiring me how dared I wrote such a letter to the Chief Justice of the LHC and asked for the disposal schedule. Further, the caller threatened me of dire consequences. On my query who this person was and under what capacity he was making the phone call (as I conveyed him of my intention to file a written complaint against him), the caller replied that he was just a junior staff member of the LHC and that he was making the call on the direction of Additional Registrar Judicial of the LHC, Syed Shabbir Hussain Shah. Of this call and its contents, I immediately informed my lawyer Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro (who was an Advocate High Court) and requested him to file a Civil Miscellaneous (CM) for a day-to-day hearing of the case. It is pertinent to mention here that I had hired the legal services of Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro to file CMs for early hearings, etc.; otherwise, the main lawyer looking after my case was Malik Muhammad Nawaz who was an Advocate Supreme Court. Advocate Malik Muhammad Nawaz had got disappointed of finding any possibility for hearing and told me that he had squandered a lot of time in attending the courts for three years without any outcome in sight and that he should be invited only when there appeared any solid possibility for hearing.

    d. Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro filed a CM (and made my letter dated 08.06.2015 its integral part), but an objection was raised by the writ branch that a day-to-day hearing was not possible. Eventually the CM was fixed for hearing on 09.05.2017 before Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah as an objection case (i.e. an objection on the maintainability of the case), under the Case Diary Number 40571/2017 (copy attached as Annexure IV).

    e. On 09.05.2017, before the arrival of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah to his court, I along with my lawyer Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro happened to have a look at the file being presented to Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah. To my surprise, the first document in the file was not the CM but my letter dated 25.04.2017 having the following portion underlined in red ink: “Now, we are in 2017 and I have a right to ask you to kindly provide me the disposal schedule for the said Writ Petition”. I was surprised because the said letter was supposed to stay in the administration part of the LHC, but it travelled to be the part of the file meant for a judicial decision. For the judicial side, my lawyer had filed the CM and this CM should have been the first document in the file. Nevertheless, the presence of the letter as the first document in the file raised an alarm because of the phone call I had received a few days ago. When the hearing of the CM started, right at its outset, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah snubbed my lawyer by saying that there was no practice of “left-over” in the LHC and that he (my lawyer) was making frivolous assertions. Denying the reality of “left-over” practised in the LHC and the implications of the stance of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah are the first basis of my complaint of misconduct against him.

    That is,

    The practice of “left-over” is a reality in the LHC devouring precious time and money of the public. No one including Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah has a right or power to muffle the voice raised to highlight the condemnable “left-over” practice rampant in the LHC. There is present no complaint cell in the LHC which could record the agony of the public sprouting from “left-over”. The “left-over” practice suits to those litigants who want to keep their cases pending (or undecided) over a long stretch of time. For instance, in my case, the “left-over” practice favoured the lawyers representing the HEC for delaying the decision on the case for three years. By suppressing the voice against the “left-over” practice, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah diminished the chances for improvement in the functioning of the LHC, the improvement which could benefit hundreds of members of public the cases of whom become victims to “left-over” daily.

    While claiming that there was no practice of “left-over” in the LHC, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah overlooked the fact that I attended all the fixtures (hearing dates) in person and each time, over the period of three years, I kept waiting until the courts were called off. Secondly, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah made this claim without conducting any enquiry into my complaint as a necessary pre-requisite before drawing a conclusion. In fact, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah protected the administration of the LHC against a member of public. Thirdly, by claiming that there was no practice of “left-over” in the LHC, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah encouraged the administration of the LHC to carry on their practice of displaying a false sense of performance through issuing cause lists but without any possibility for hearing the cases under the practice of “left-over”.

    The protection offered by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah to the administration of the LHC is detrimental to the interests of the public at large who visit the LHC daily for getting their grievances addressed and who pay from their pockets hefty salaries and perquisites of all the judges and the administration staff of the LHC.

    The point is simple: if protectionism is apposite, legalize or formalize it through law (or legislation). Why is it so that the chief judge practices protectionism for his subordinate staff and earns accolades and their loyalty, but if a head of any other institution practices the same, he is derided and punished by the same judge. In this way, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is guilty of promoting hypocrisy both inside the LHC and in society.

    The conduct of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in this regard is unbecoming of the Chief Justice of the LHC. Through protectionism, he has thrown the public at large to the disposal of the administration of the LHC.

    f. On 09.05.2017, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah said that he sustained the objection raised by the writ branch/office and hence the day-to-day hearing was not possible. On the same day, the staffer (munshi) of my lawyer Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro applied for the copy of the outcome of the CM (objection case).

    g. On 18.05.2017, again the cause list was issued for regular hearing in the court of Justice Mudassir Khalid Abbasi, and again the court remained functional from 9 am to 11:30 am, and again my Writ Petition was “left-over”, to this I again wrote a letter to Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah (copy attached as Annexure V). The staff of the judge later on (after they came back from attending the double bench) declared 11.09.2017 the next date of hearing. This point led me to write a letter dated 20.05.2017 under the subject, “Formal complaint against the Chief Justice of Lahore High Court”, addressed to Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Islamabad (copy attached as Annexure VI).

    These points take the discussion to the next part.

    Part II

    This part exposes a barefaced lie of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah

    a. On 30.05.2017, the copy supply section of the LHC issued the true copy of the CM (having the case diary number 40571/2017) which was having two paras (copy attached as Annexure VII). The first para was about sustaining the objection of maintainability raised by the office. However, there was present the second para saying to my utter surprise the following: “Learned counsel insists that the main case be taken up by this Court due to urgency in the matter. Keeping this request in view, the main case is taken up today.” This statement of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is a blatant lie.

    b. Luckily, I was a witness to the hearing. My counsel did not at all request Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah to take up the case – let alone insistence. The lie told by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in his decision is the second basis of my complaint of misconduct against him.

    That is,

    By writing such a statement in his decision (on the order sheet), Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is guilty of breaching my faith in the chair of a judge generally and in the office of the chief justice particularly. Telling a lie is unbecoming of a judge and renders Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah misfit for even the job of a judge – not to say the chief judge. I am still stunned to find out that the chief judge of a province could be so barefaced.

    Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah overlooked the fact that he did not enjoy unfettered discretionary powers to do whatever he deemed fit: the discretionary powers vested in the office of a judge or a chief judge are also defined by certain limits – at least these do not empower him to tell a lie and swivel the whole case around. The seat of the chief justice of LHC is a trust and no chief judge can transgress the boundaries of honesty and scrupulousness.

    Advocate Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro could have never requested the court to take up the matter then and there because he was not the main lawyer in my case, nor was he paid for that. Instead, he was there just to defend the CM for day-to-day hearing of the case (the task to accomplish which his legal services were hired). Nevertheless, this reprehensible act of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah answered a question why young lawyers insult and resort to attacking judges in the courts.

    Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah overlooked that fact that, as a senior, he taught a junior lawyer, Chaudhry Imran Arshad Naro, the lesson of deceit with effrontery. By not being honest and upright, if a judge does not respect the office he is holding, why he should expect from others to respect his office. Instilling respect in the hearts of people through one’s diligence, probity and rectitude is a weapon far stronger than the formidable tool of Contempt of Court.

    The ease with which Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah has done such an act (tantamount to perjury, i.e. lying when under oath) means that he is habitual of doing the same act over a length of time and perhaps no one has made him accountable for the same, except this time. This judge should not only be unfrocked but he should also be meted out due punishment for such an act of malfeasance.

    These points take the discussion to the next part.

    Part III

    This part exposes certain grave flaws in the decision he took on Writ Petition 17393/2014.

    a. On another page of order sheet, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah writes that he heard the full case on 09.05.2017 and found no force in the instant petition which was therefore dismissed (copy attached as Annexure VIII).

    b. This order sheet reveals the dismal state of the expertise of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah as a judge, who further writes: “I have gone through the record. Section 5(1) of the [HEC] Ordinance [2002] states as under:- ‘(1) The Controlling Authority shall appoint a person of international eminence and proven ability who has made significant contribution to higher education as teacher, researcher, or administrator, as Chairperson on such terms and conditions as it may determine.’ The qualifications for the post of a chairperson are that he should be a person of international eminence, who has made significant contribution to higher education as a teacher, researcher or administrator. Curriculum Vitae of respondent No. 2 [the incumbent Chairperson of the HEC], which has already been placed on the record by the petitioner, reveals that respondent No. 2 holds a Ph.D in Botany, University of California, USA, and MBA/MS from the same university and M.Sc honours from University of Agriculture, Faisalabad.”

    c. It is apparent that, despite his claim that he went through the record, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah did not read Writ Petition 17393/2014. In fact, he solely relied on one of its annexures displaying the Curriculum Vitae (CV) of Dr Mukhtar Ahmed, the incumbent Chairperson of the HEC and the respondent No. 2, overlooking the fact that there were attached other five CVs (of Dr Najma Najam, Dr Niaz Ahmed Akhtar, Dr Javed Legari, Dr Muhammad Qasim Jan and Dr Nizam Uddin) for a comparative analysis in the annexure part of the same Writ Petition (copy attached as Annexure IX). This is where Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah has been caught red handed in displaying his privation of analytical skills and such a radical deficiency in a judge is the third basis of my complaint of misconduct against Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

    That is,

    Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is unaware of the meaning of certain terms used in Section 5(1) of the HEC Ordinance 2002, such as a person of “international eminence”, “proven ability”, and “significant contribution to higher education”. The judge did not even bother to read Writ Petition 17393/2014, in the Grounds section of which all these terms and their relevance were described. This finding also shows that Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah considers the submission of a written Writ Petition a useless effort. If submitting a written Writ Petition is insignificant, there is no harm in declaring the submission of a written Writ Petition a redundant or prohibited practice.

    Displaying his parochial state of mind, the judge arbitrarily relied on only one CV without doing its comparative analysis with other five CVs and without refuting (with reasons) the rest of the five CVs, if he wanted to make the CV a criterion to decide. This is a display of ineptitude on the part of Syed Mansoor Ali Shah as a judge. Parochialism is the bane of objectivity: Parochialism ineludibly promotes subjectivity. I teach this point to my pupils almost daily.

    This finding leads to raising other questions, what is the recruitment process of these judges, especially Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah. What criteria did Syed Mansoor Ali Shah meet to become a judge of the LHC? Further, what is taught at judicial training academies?

    Dear Sir,

    Just to reiterate, in light of the aforementioned discussion, I, Dr Qaisar Rashid, a member of public, call Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court, guilty of misconduct and request you to take cognizant of the matter under the dictates of Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan.

    I hope that no effort will be made by your office to protect Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, the rights of whom are already protected under “Punishment for frivolous information”.

    Sincerely, Dated: 03.06.2017

    Dr Qaisar Rashid
    2-B, Ashrafia Park, Ferozepur Road, Lahore.
    Cell: 03364189087

  • 0_1498079233851_01.jpg 0_1498079245159_02.jpg 0_1498079251163_03.jpg 0_1498079260140_04.jpg 0_1498079263815_05.jpg 0_1498079267643_06.jpg

  • Whatsaap Leak MAFIA characters must respond to their unlawful act, in light of Malik Quyyum crime. Otherwise people will say "kuch sharam huti h, kuch hija huti, kuch ethics huti hein, koi law nam ki cheez huti, koi constitution huta h". Pasha Party ky lafafoon ki Sher Phobia bakwas Black Label Honey pi ky. Under which law, Nargis Khosa Group of Godfather judges used Whatsaap calls, not legal in Pakistan law. aaj ki report tek aik paisa corruption nahi Great Sher par, lagta h chori chori ka rona Jemima ki chadi ki chori ka h. ro mochi burger ro

  • Jews lobbies are dominated by Rothschild and Morgan groups, this is also known as INTERNATIONAL ESTABLISHMENT. They rule money (dollars) and with it rule the world with their franchise and puppet power USA for physical threats. It was USA who when Liaqat Ali Khan refused to give base to USA against China, went on for First USA Viceroy via Martial Law using Ayoub Khan. Later used Yayha Khan, ZIa ul Haq and Perviaz Mushararf type gaddars.

    Know China dominate Pakistan economy and defence mechanism, China is key factor to control Martial Law in Pakistan as 90% weapon system are of Chinese origin. Rothschild lobby smells Nawaz Sharif as key factor in China investment and advance, ultimate threat for them in global economic hegemony.

    They went for other mean used their Franchise Bani Gala Rangeela with Boot supporting. Bani Gala Rangeela who can not think of even becoming Councillor at own, never thought of chartered plane travelling and was never given time in isolation by media, suddenly in 2012 was painted as political ghost.

    65% electronic media and 90% social media was bought to win 2013 elections with propaganda and boot support, but failed. Boot manage them to cantonments and urban areas with bogus voting, that too just few seats. KPK central belt is always manipulated by agencies was given as gift to Pasha Party.

    After loosing 2013 elections and when CPEC was about to launch, Pasha London Plan 1 was worked out in London with 6 Perviaz Musharraf Gaddar community paid Lieutenant Generals using elite agency in key support. Shuja Pasha was key coordinator, Zaheer Abbassi as Pakistan based coordinator and Brigadier Zahid were Islamabad coordinator. What happens, all know, CPEC delayed, Boots managed to rescue Perviaz Mushararf Gaddar and got veto power on USA+India+Afghanistan foreign policy alignment. Judges were bought for judicial murder, Javed Hashmi disclosed entire plan so could not manifested. General Rizwan ordered a local inquiry of elite agency, it was found overs Rs 100/- Crore were sent to Canada, from where it was paid to Pasha Party and Gullu Qadri firqa alongwith lafafa media. With all efforts, Rs 46/- Crore was still found that was unable to be regularized, so inquiry was pending. Rothschild investments was about Rs 1500/- Crore in it.

    When Bani Gala went on private vocations visit to Maldive, in 2015 Pasha London Plan 2 was worked out. Shuja Pasha, Daniel S Mecay, CIA chief and many other power houses actors were present. It was told that Pajama Leak is being leaked in near future, world around it will be calmed but in Pakistan it as to be terminated with death or ousting of Sharif Family. Huge spending was made on Lafafa media, who started doing propaganda on fake / manufactured papers soon it was aired, Umer Cheema was selected by ICIJ as belong to Jhang group, termed close to PML N so that credibility can be enhanced. Boots created Dawn Leaks drama, with Shuja Pasha efforts to black mail NS, but he refused to surrender. To give respectable way out it was decided that Dawn Leaks inquiry will be ordered and Pasha London Plan 2 lockdown, boots will play neutral. Hencewith Pasha London Plan 2 was miserably knocked out with Allah blessings. Seeing all Bani Gala Rangeela opted for SCP, as directed by Rothschild lobby.

    Pasha London Plan 2 was modified as 'Judicial Murder Plan' using Asif Saeed Khosa (whose sister was divorced by SS). To bring him in game, Bani Gala Rangeela objected CJP Saqib Nisar as remained close to SS. He surrendered and Asif Saeed Khosa took all out command of Nargis Khosa Group of Judges. Respondent did not give single evidence, it was plan that 3 judges will out NS out with out any evidence, constitutional and law. Bani Gala Rangeela met Chief and convoyed that he will abide SCP judgement, Army should also ensure implementation. He knows Judicial Murder Judgement. Azmat Shiekh (Amir Nazir and he both did best to punish NS during Pervaiz Musharraf Gaddar era, managed to break Shafi and Ishaq Dar statements with extraordinary torture too) met heart attack, plan was again modified with 2 - 3 instead of 3 - 2 to murder using JIT shoulders. JIT will be hand picked.

    Whatsaap was used to bring names of Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA so that they can select names, claim later that departments gave names, they picked out of them. 2 names Amir Nazir and Rasool was of key focus. Brigadier Nauman Saeed is another name which is against law, as SCP asked for Brigadier. firstly he is retired from 3 years, later presently enlisted as 'source employ' and thirdly even serving on contract, as per Ministry of Defense rules/law, retired officer is enlisted with contract on rank down, so he is enlisted as 'Colonel'. Its employment is definitely prerogative of Spy Chief. Mangi of NAB is another but no evidence against is held on Whatsaap Leak. When Whatsaap Leak conspiracy was disclosed, by same Jang Group who disclosed Pajama Leak (Umer Cheema) Rothschild lobby and Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA was extremely annoyed. So far could not give any response, they knows as per Zardari case, where Zardari was bailed out just because of a call between Malik Quyyum and Saif ur Rehman, same principal law is imposed here.

    Qatar gave a befitting answer, business in Qatar is done as per Qatar Govt rules, anybody has doubt come to Qatar Supreme Court, business rules in Qatar has nothing to do with Pakistan. They affirm what is given in letter, still want to come to Qatar, welcome. Whatsaap Leak JIT has no courage to go to Qatar.

    Just focusing on Hudibia Paper mills, case jointly handled by Amir Nazir and Azmat Shiekh in 2001 -2002. Not calling Ishaq Dar, why??????

    They knows, Ishaq Dar will come and point that Amir Nazir with Azmat Sahiekh tortured him for this statements, his verdict will come in lime light and expose both. Marley focusing on Sharif Family. So far less same old Hudibia Case, nothing else is available to discuss by Whatsaap Leak JIT.

    Now called Maryam Safdar, whose name was not their even judgement given by Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA, will earn nothing, Allah is kind on Pakistan, popularity of Sharif Family is increased many times after this conspiracy, on the other hand popularity of Rothschild Zameerfrosh/Vulgarity Franchise in Pakistan - Bani Gala Rangeela is on declined, limited to lafafa media and social media.

    Sher Phobia aik la ilaj marz h --------- Ro Mochi Burger Ro

  • Whatsaap Leak JIT and Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA failed to find a 1 Piasia corruption against Sharif Family, all focus is on Hudaibiya Paper Mills case. In reals case is of Jemima or Aleema Chadi chori..

    Rehman Malik is called who stated it on political designs, alleviated from Sub Inspector to Additional Director FIA for arresting 80 years old Mian Sharif by BB in 1993-94.

    Later Perviaz Mushararf Gaddar took over it in 2000 - 02 with General Amjad (Chairman NAB), Azmat Shiekh (Prosecutor) and Amir Aziz (Investigator), all picked up on sher phobia qualification. General Amjad is called by Whatsaap Leak JIT, why not Whatsaap Leak characters Azmat Shiekh and Amir Aziz giving statement???? Both did best to allege Sharif on Hudaibiya Case, both were part of torture which forced Ishaq Dar to give statement under duress. Both should show moral courage if are real son of their mothers.

    Kuch sharam huti h, kuch hija huti h, kuch ethics huti hein, kuch constitution or law huta h, koi moral courage huti h.

    Ro Mochi Burger Ro

  • Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa

    Justice Gulzar Ahmed

    Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan

    Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan

    Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed

    Supreme Court of Pakistan

    Subject: Accountability of the Higher Judiciary

    Dear Sirs,

    Like all other Pakistanis, I also read eagerly your verdict on the Panama-leak case, which infused successfully the term “Godfather” into the body politic of Pakistan.

    The judiciary itself is not immune to any such version of “Godfather”. In this regard, kindly do read my complaint dated 03.06.2017. The complaint was filed under Article 209 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan with Chairman Supreme Judicial Council, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, against the misconduct of Chief Justice of Lahore High Court, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

    The complaint was delivered in the Supreme Court on 05.06.2017 (copy of both the complaint and the receipt attached). A reminder was sent on 10.06.2017 (copy attached). Both are still unheeded.

    In the Panama-leak verdict, to get your point across, you had to rely anachronistically on Mario Puzo’s novel “The Godfather” authored 48 years ago in 1969; however, in my complaint, to meet the canons of synchronism, I have dwelt on the 2017 version of “Godfather” holding the reins of the Lahore High Court.

    You might have read many more such novels; however, I happen to have read some books. Let us see each other soon to figure out, in this country, where bureaucrats (i.e. the executive) are selected through a publicly held competitive exam, and politicians (i.e. the legislature) are elected through a publicly held electoral process, what the mode of selection of judges (i.e. the judiciary) is for any high court – the judges who may later on promoted to join the Supreme Court.

    The judiciary as a state institution can make a comparison of its position and authority vis-à-vis those of the executive and the legislature under the Constitution of 1973, but the judiciary is overlooking the fact that it runs on public expenditure. That is, anyone, whether they are bureaucrats, lawmakers or judges, drawing salaries from the public exchequer are duty bound to respond and be answerable to the members of public.

    One month has lapsed but Chairman Supreme Judicial Council Justice Mian Saqib Nisar has not responded to my complaint. This is what the problem is in this country. Ferreting out and deriding a “Godfather” in other institutions of the state is a savoury pastime, but becoming “Godfather” himself is a privilege and prerogative.

    Notwithstanding the protection to the judiciary enshrined in the Constitution, public scrutiny cannot spare the judiciary, which must brave the complaint filed.

    In the meantime, you may read the complaint and see if you can rebut it.

    Sincerely, Dated: 04.07.2017

    Dr Qaisar Rashid
    2-B, Ashrafia Park, Ferozepur Road, Lahore.
    Cell: 03364189087

    Copy for information and record:

    1. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Chairman Supreme Judicial Council, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Constitution Avenue, G-5/2, Islamabad.
    2. Transparency International – Pakistan, 5-C, 1st Floor, Khayaban-e-Ittehad, Phase VII, DHA, Karachi.

  • 0_1499553380925_Qaisar 1.jpg

  • @qaisarrashid ![0_1499729051784_Qaisar 001.jpg](Uploading 100%) 0_1499729240514_Picture1.jpg

  • The Supreme Judicial Council is still shying away from replying to my letters.

  • SUMMARY FROM 2013 TO 2017

    1. NS met with Chinese PM before taking oath, dreamed CPEC and thus dug grave as it felt threat to Rothschild Lobby. CPEC dream was on during Zardari, but corrupt Zardari was not Chinese choice, though he won 2008 elections after massive rigging by elite intelligence agency.

    2. Shuja Pasha a CIA agent has worked on Pasha Party from 2011, Jews bought media (65% Pakistan media) and 90% social media to make Bani Gala Rangeela what he is today.

    3. Pasha London Plan 1 was to stop signing of CPEC, Pasha London Plan 2 was stop launching of CPEC by ousting NS. on NS and Chinese wisdom Army Establishment was brought in CPEC under security umbrella. Pasha London Plan 1 failed for Rothschild and its only out come was rescue of Perviaz Musharraf Gaddar plus Army took control of foreign policy matters regarding USA, Afghanistan and India. Gullu Qadri promised will give 50 causalities in Model Town to ignite Pasha London Plan movement but gave just 10 / 11 dead bodies, public support was not also as per thoughts besides massive lafafa media propaganda, other reasons for failure.

    4. Pajama Leak was CPEC specific, worked out during Maldives holidays of Bani Gala Rangeela by CIA, MI 6, Rothschild Lobby, Daniel S Mecay, Younus Al Goher and other anti Chinese jokers. Not a single inquiry was conducted anywhere in world, Chines/Russia banned any Pajama related barking, so NS first step to One Belt One Road became target.

    5. Dawn Leak was manufactured by Establishment to take control of NS with massive Pasha Party lafafa media propaganda. but failed.

    6. Pasha London Plan 2 was than modified to Judicial Murder Plan, as all Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA were PCO Judges of Perviaz Musharraf Gaddar good time. Massive bribe was given, judgement was 3 - 2 against NS, but Azmat Shiekh met heart attack, which worried MAFIA, plan was modified 3 - 2 in favour of a JIT and NS disqualification was saved. A Whatsaap JIT was founded using practices illegal as per SCP rules, law and constitution of Pakistan.

    7. Quite written on Whatsaap JIT and Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA, Rasool and Amir Aziz belongs to Pasha Party, Mangi enrollment illegal as per SCP verdict on NAB, Nomi is not Brigadier in ISI, retired quite long and is a source employee. Took 67 days to make a report and already submitted to Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA.


    1. Elite Intelligence gathered many documents after taking over by USA Viceroy in Pakistan via Martial Law Perviaz Musharraf Gaddar, but failed as all these documents were forged, felt disgrace if judges noticed. All record in trash against NS / Sharif Family was packe din 62 boxes and kept in elite agency stores.

    2. During Pasha London Plan 1, it has to go in 2 parts. Part 1 cordon of PM House, violence outside in RED ZONE to force him run out to save his life, where a technocrat set up has to took over. Part 2 was Judicial murder, as hinted by Javed Hashmi even, to put Sharif Family behind bars once again. NS did not ran to save his life, plan failed. Zaheer Islam Abbassi was head of elite agency and Shuaj Pasha was employee of UAE security agency. UAE feels threatened from CPEC especially Gawader port. Zaheer Islam and Shuja Pasha took out 20000 to 25000 selected papers, which were tempered using Toby Cadman (MI 6 legal consultant) in UK and UAE security agency where Shuja Pasha is employed in 2014.

    3. Shuja Pasha also gave these documents to Jews for launching Pajama Leaks.

    4. Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA gave control of Judicial Academy to Elite Intelligence Agency as per Daily NEWS (same paper whose journalist was used by ICIJ for Pajama conspiracy to give legitimacy, as Geo / Jhang can not be suspected).

    5. All these tempered documents were once again handed over with a copy of complete investigation report being scripted in 2014/15.

    6. It is said "for cheating you needs mind too", Whatsaap JIT if have put on a brief to the point report would have been saved from humiliation, but they went with script written 2 years back. This is why you find many a times years are referred when Whatsaap JIT even did not exist. Just one example, 100000 such stupidities can be seen.....

    7. Shuaj Pasha met Whatsap JIT few members in UAE, gave them old forged documents with new date signatures using his masters influence in UAE. Akhter Raja (cousin of Wajid Zia and activist of Pasha Party, which provide fake documents to Faisal Vodka even) was used as shadow, actual tempering in new dates was done by Toby Cadman and Rothschild/Goldsmith legal team.

    8. In British Virgin island did not go to authority which hold record, but to a subsidiary type body and propagated him 'Attorney', simple instead of asking tricky question to SECP asked questions to IB if in Pakistan it has to be asked.

    9. Paper is amply postmortem, well discussed in media, so no more on its contents. Pasha Part lafafa media is propagating it as they are shouting for Bani Gala Rangeela from last 5 - 6 years, so nothing new. In emotions leaked a UAE tempered document of Volume 10, which was requested by Whatsaap JIT not be opened. Volume 10 is group of Fake consultants who were bribed. Rs 23 to 34 Crore was bribed for the tempering of papers by Whatsaap JIT.

    10. IB worked extraordinary and as evidence of this tempering/bribery besides a copy of Zaheer ul Islam JIT report on which Whatsaap Leak JIT worked. Who leaked it from Elite Intelligence Agency to Sharifs is so far not confirmed.

    11. Whatsaap JIT was so scared that DID NOT MENTIONED SINGLE RUPEE CORRUPTION against Sharifs in its comedy scripts, took shelter of intelligence terminology on comments against Sharif business like probably, possibly, its seems, likely .....

    12. Pasha Party lafafa media is doing all, but failed to convince masses in Pakistan, as lost its credibility. All eyes are on Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA, lets see whether judicial murder plan succeed or not.


    1. SCP giving all out time to him as 'ladla bacha', changed many lawyers, used Lafafa media to misguide people but failed to give sing money trail. He will never be able to give even.

    2. Bani Gala Farm House was gifted by Perviaz Musharraf Gaddar over support in referendum using Riaz Tekhdar of Bahria and Taji Kokhar, only they can give money trail like Ayyan Ali.

    3. Niazi Enterprise is corruption icon of Ikram Ullah Niazi, who managed to take corruption money out of Pakistan after NRO with Zia ul Haq (USA 3rd Viceroy via Martial Law) and opened offshore company on the name of "Bani Gala Rangeela, Aleema, Uzma".

    4. Anti Pakistan (including Israel, India) evils gave funding to Pasha Party using SKMH NGO and Pasha Party funding NGOs, here to hide individuals Pasha Party has to take shadow of ghost NGOs, hence caught, crime as per law and constitution of Pakistan.


    1. All Pakistan sure Sharif Family has not done single paisa corruption to Pakistan State money, it is even stamped by Whatsaap JIT as did not wrote single word on it. Personal business is tricky affair, that is why chartered accountants and audit consultant exist, minor lapses even exist in all accounts.

    2. Allah has blessing on him, made in PM for third time nobody has thought after 199, saved from pasha London Plan 1, Dawn Leaks conspiracy, likely evil judgement of Nargis Khosa Group of Judges MAFIA and hereafter too.

    3. Only issue is CPEC and 2018 elections. By the grace of Allah no party has ability to contest PML N in politics, so all going for conspiracy, if NS is dead/out of politics they can have any chance.

  • If the Supreme Judicial Council does not hold judges accountable, the Council should be declared defunct.

  • Holding others accountable but avoiding the accountability of its own rank is a shame. The higher judiciary needs to open itself to accountability.

  • No one is above law including the judiciary itself. The higher judiciary is as accountable as other institutions of the state.