14 Everyday Problems That Have Morphed In Bizarre Ways

By CRACKED Readers  Published: April 13th, 2018 

from Cracked: All Posts https://ift.tt/2GSKK6i

When Somebody Else's Identity Theft Scam Gets You Arrested

By Ryan Menezes  Published: April 13th, 2018 

from Cracked: All Posts https://ift.tt/2qvcrqN

6 Pieces Of Fan Art That Prove We're Doomed

By Jason Iannone  Published: April 13th, 2018 

from Cracked: All Posts https://ift.tt/2GURYqG

Consultant

Consultant (NGO) - Karachi

f....[more]

from BrightSpyre Jobs https://ift.tt/2JIfaWP

Assistant Manager-Marketing

Assistant Manager-Marketing (VC TAT Project) - Lahore

f....[more]

from BrightSpyre Jobs https://ift.tt/2vgPrRU

Marketing Officer

Marketing Officer (VC TAT Project) - Lahore

f....[more]

from BrightSpyre Jobs https://ift.tt/2JIf4OX

Shehbaz Sharif strongly defends Nawaz after SC verdict

ISLAMABAD: Chief Minister Punjab and President Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Shehbaz Sharif strongly defended his elder brother and the quaid of his party Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, who has been disqualified for life in a verdict by the Supreme Court of Pakistan here on Friday.Shehbaz Sharif in a statement issued here on Friday said: “Today is a day of test for the nation when a judicial decision has barred a popular national leader from serving the county who made it a nuclear power and who has the distinct honor of being elected Prime Minister thrice”.He said that Nawaz Sharif is not the name of a person. Rather he represents a philosophy and an ideology of public service, supremacy of constitution and respect of vote. “A leader like him does not need any formal office to continue guiding his party and serving his people”, he added. The chief minister Punjab said: “We have always believed in the supremacy of law and the neutrality of its arbiters. Despite the judicial verdict, PML-N will continue to be the largest political party of the country under the guidance of Nawaz Sharif”.A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, announced the reserved verdict in the cases involving interpretation, determination of the question of temporary or permanent bar on the parliamentarians to contest elections.The apex court ruled that disqualification of lawmakers under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution disqualification is permanent. Thus, Nawaz Sharif and, Jahangir Khan Tareen were also disqualified under the same provision of the constitution.

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2qtEEhI

Disqualification not applicable in my case, says Jahangir Tareen

ISLAMABAD: Responding to Supreme Court verdict over petitions seeking duration of disqualification under Article 62(1)(f), Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Jahangir Tareen said he knew that the disqualification would be for life.Tareen tweeted: "I always believed 62 1(f) to be for life but not applicable in my case.""Full money trail provided of tax paid Income, property declared in assets of children and not mine on advice of tax consultant. This was the only issue. My review is still pending and IA justice will prevail," the former secretary general of PTI further said.The SC on Friday in its landmark judgment ruled that disqualification of a lawmaker under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution would be for lifetime.Justice Umar Ata Bandyal read out 60 pages verdict in the cases involving interpretation / determination of the question of temporary or permanent bar to contest elections.The judmen stated that “a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless he is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law,” reads Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution of Pakistan”.The five-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, unanimously observed that such a restriction would be fair in a democratic set up.“The disqualification will hold as long as the declaratory judgment supporting the conclusion of one of the delinquent kinds of conduct under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution remains in effect”, read the judgment.“The absence of a time limit for the ineligibility of a candidate for election in Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is the basis for holding his incapacity to be incurable by efflux of time, the reasons recorded in our judgment reinforce that conclusion” verdict added.“Some of the counsels expressed concern over lifetime disqualification and worry that this may be disproportionate and a little harsh, however such arguments are perhaps more suitable to the floor of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) than at the bar before this Court, Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed said in his additional note.“It is an equally elemental principle of interpretation of the Constitution that nothing can be added thereto, therefore, we (SC) cannot read into Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, a period of such lack of qualification, which is not mentioned therein”.He said that the Constitution had empowered this court to interpret the Constitution or law but not to amend it.“This aspect of the matter is rather ironic as several persons before us were or had been the Members of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) at some point of time and may have passed the amendments, which now stand in their way.” judgment stated.The bench had reserved the judgment on February 14 after hearing the litigants, leading counsels, and amicus curiae in the case to determine whether a lawmaker disqualified under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is disqualified from becoming a member of the parliament for life or temporarily.‏

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2GUR1ue

Multimedia: Jashan-e-Qaqlasht 2018 in Chitral seeks to uplift tourism in region

CHITRAL: The four-day Qaqlasht festival showcasing an amalgamation of sports competitions kicked off at the 8000 feet high tourist resort near Booni in Upper Chitral on Thursday.Deputy Commissioner Irshad Sudher, along with famous artiste Dul Khan and noted sitar player Mir Wali inaugurated the festival by unfurling the flag.A large number of people, tourists and students from different educational institutions attended the event on the first day.The students presented national anthem and sang national songs.Speaking on the occasion, DC Irshad Sudher said that Chitral was paradise for the tourists and visitors. He said the scenic district had a treasure trove of culture, beauty and above all an exemplary peaceful environment for tourist to enjoy.There is a lot of potential of tourism in the District which needs to be explored, he stated. In order to encourage the youth to take part in these healthy activities DC Chitral Irshad personally started rock climbing.The official called upon the national and international tourists and visitors to come and enjoy natural beauty of lush green valleys, snow-capped mountains, rivers, landscapes, rich cultural heritage, springs, streams and serene spots.The festival is also showcasing different sports competitions including polo, sports for the physically challenged persons, traditional food stalls, cultural show, tug-of-war, skate shooting, marathon race, volleyball, cricket, football, archery and music night.Other games like falcon prey, hockey and other activities like quiz competitions, mushaira and paragliding are other features of the festival.

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2HfMaHB

Senate passes bill extending SC, PHC jurisdiction to FATA

ISLAMABAD: The Senate on Friday passed the bill extending jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and  the Peshawar High court to Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).The Supreme Court and High Court (Extension of Jurisdiction to Fata) Bill 2017 was presented in the upper house of the parliament by Senator Abdul Qadir Baloch, Geo News reported.Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) and the Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party boycotted the bill and lawmakers from bothe the parties staged walkout.The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) passed the bill in the absence of both the protesting parties.

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2GTu3Uf

Additional note of Justice Sh Azmat Saeed in disqualification verdict

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) is for life thus ending the political  future of former prime minster Nawaz Sharif  and several other lawmakers including Jahangir Tareen of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf .Justice Umer Ata Bandial read out unanimous verdict in Courtroom No 1. However Justice  Sh. Azmat Saeed wrote an additional note. "I concur with the conclusions drawn in the said judgment but I do not find myself in agreement with reasoning employed in its entirety," he wrote.The note is produced hereunder:Sh. Azmat Saeed, J.- I have had the privilege to go through the judgment of my learned brother Umer Ata Bandial, J., though I concur with the conclusions drawn in the said judgment but I do not find myself in agreement with reasoning employed in its entirety. 2. The adjudication of the lis at hand requires the interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 so as to determine the period of time to which the lack of qualification in terms thereof shall extend. The aforesaid provision is reproduced herein below for ease of reference:-“62. (1) A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless:- …………………………………………….……………………………………………. (f) he is sagacious, righteous, nonprofligate, honest, and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law; and ……………………………………………….…………………………………………….... The words and expressions denoting the attributes for being qualified to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), as spelt forth in the aforesaid provision, leaves no manner of doubt that the same i.e. Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is rooted in and inspired by our Islamic values. It is not necessary to dwell further on this aspect of the matter in the instant proceedings. However, the said provision must be interpreted with great care, caution and respect.3. The historical background and various amendments, which have been periodically introduced into Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution have been very ably dealt with by my learned brother in his judgment and need not to be repeated. However, Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is required to be interpreted as it stands today. A plain reading of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution reveals that in order to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), the person must be, inter alia, sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest, and ameen. However, if there is a declaration by a Court of Law to the contrary i.e. he is not sagacious or righteous or non-profligate, honest, and ameen then such person shall not be qualified to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament). A declaration by the Court of Law would mean a conclusive finding. Obviously, such finding would be with regard to a lis before the Court, arising out of the violation of a law or non-fulfillment of a legal obligation. It is clear and obvious that lack of qualifications in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is the effect of a declaration by a Court of Law to the contrary, which is the cause. The obvious, legal and logical conclusion would be as long as the cause i.e. the declaration of a Court of Law holds the field its effect i.e. the lack of qualification shall also prevail. This appears to be the only possible interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.4. The expression “declared by a Court” has also been used in Article 63(1)(a) of the Constitution, which is reproduced hereunder:“63(1)(a) he is of unsound mind and has been so declared by a competent court; or” (underlining is for emphasis)5. Obviously, in the aforesaid circumstances, the disqualification would continue as long as the declaration regarding the mental incapacity subsists. No sane person could seriously urge to the contrary.6. During the course of hearing of the instant proceedings, a large number of counsels addressed at the bar, both on behalf of various parties and as amicus curie. Each and every counsel was confronted with the above mentioned obvious interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution that the lack of qualification was the effect of the declaration by a Court of Law, which was the cause and the duration of such effect would be the duration of the cause i.e. declaration. The response on behalf of the learned counsels by and large that upon an accumulative reading of Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution pertaining to the qualifications and disqualifications of a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) would reveal that disqualifications resulting from acts and omissions of much greater gravity the period of disqualification is limited, hence that lack of qualification in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution cannot be perpetual. It was also contended that lack of qualifications in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution also falls squarely within the disqualification as is set forth in Article 63(1)(h) of the Constitution and the negative impact thereof is for a limited period of time.7. Adverting first to Article 63(1)(h) of the Constitution, the reasons for disqualifications provided therein do not appear to be congruent with the lack of qualifications as set forth in Article 62(1(f) of the Constitution. More importantly, if such an interpretation is accepted, it would make Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution superfluous and redundant. It is an elemental principle of the interpretation of the Constitution that surplusage cannot be attributed to any provision of the Constitution, hence, it is legally impossible to accept this contention.8. No doubt the period of disqualification in certain sub-Articles of Article 63 of the Constitution has been provided but such a sunset clause is not found in Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution. The framers of the Constitution chose not to do so. This Court is empowered to interpret the Constitution but not to amend it. It is an equally elemental principle of interpretation of the Constitution that nothing can be added thereto, therefore, we cannot read into Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, a period of such lack of qualification, which is not mentioned therein.9. Some of the learned counsels also voiced that perhaps the effect of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution qua the period of lack of qualification may be disproportionate and a little harsh. Such arguments are perhaps more suitable to the floor of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) than at the bar before this Court. We, as stated above, can only interpret the Constitution not amend or change it. This aspect of the matter is rather ironic as several persons before us were or had been the Members of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) at some point of time and may have passed the amendments, which now stand in their way.10. None of the learned counsels, who appeared before us confronted the elephant in the room i.e. the obvious interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is that lack of the qualification to a Member is the effect of declaration by a Court of Law, which is the cause and period of lack of qualification would be co-extensive with the period to the cause i.e. declaration. None of the learned counsels refuted the aforesaid obvious interpretation but only sidestepped the issue.11. However, at the very end, the learned Attorney General for Pakistan addressed the Court and in no uncertain terms stated that once declaration has been made by a Court of Law that a person is not sagacious or righteous or non-profligate or honest and ameen, such a person is not qualified to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament). This lack of qualification is the effect of the aforesaid declaration, which is the cause and as long as the declaration by the Court holds the field, the person in respect of whom such declaration has been made will continue to be deprived of the qualifications to be a Member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament). 12. The stand taken by the learned Attorney General for Pakistan is not only fair but is also in accordance with the obvious and self-evident intent of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution. Incidentally, this Court on more than one occasions has already held that lack of qualification suffered under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is in perpetuity. Reference, in this behalf, may be made to the judgments of this Court reported as Mian Najeeb-ud-Din Owasi and another v. Amir Yar Waran and others (PLD 2013 SC 482), Muhammad Nasir Mahmood and another v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights Division, Islamabad (PLD 2009 SC 107) and Allah Dino Khan Bhayo v. Election Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad and others (2013 SCMR 1655), and no reason has been advanced to persuade me to take a different view. Judge

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2GVRoZI

Female Facilitators

Female Facilitators () - Bara

t....[more]

from BrightSpyre Jobs https://ift.tt/2qrTcOY

Opponents should fear new era of Nawaz politics, says Marriyum after SC ruling

State Minister for Information Marriyum Aurangzeb said on Friday PMLN's opponents should fear the era of Nawaz Sharif's politics that has just began with the Supreme Court verdict that declared the disqualification of Sharif and other lawmakers under article 62(1)(f)  perpetual.She was talking to media outside the Supreme Court after it  announced the verdict on multiple petitions seeking to determine period of disqualification of lawmakers.She said the judgement was the same joke which 17 prime ministers of the country had earlier faced."It is the same verdict which led to Shaheed Bhutto's hanging and martyrdom of Benazir Bhutto. Today, once again three-time prime minister of the country has been disqualified".She said Nawaz Sharif is standing trial under Supreme court order which disqualifed him over an Iqama (work permit). The state minister said it was ironic that an elected prime minister is disqualified first and trial begins latter.She said Sharif was disqualified, removed from the party leadership and then his popular political party was barred from contesting Senate election.She said only the people who elected their prime minister had the right to disqualify him.She said similar decision came in plane hijacking case against Nawaz Sharif but there is no suo motu against the person who abrogated the constitution, referring to Pervez Musharraf.She said Nawaz Sharif lives in the hearts of people who would not accept this disqualification.

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2HvbZRs

Nawaz, Tareen disqualified for life: Complete Supreme Court order

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that disqualification of lawmakers under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution disqualification is permanent.Nawaz Sharif and Jahangir Khan Tareen were also disqualified under the same provision of the constitution. A five-member larger bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, announced the reserved verdict in the cases involving interpretation, determination of the question of temporary or permanent bar on the parliamentarians to contest elections.The verdict was read out by Justice Umar Ata Bandial in the courtroom 1.Following is the complete Supreme Court verdict 

from The News International - National https://ift.tt/2Hob8Eu