What's happened in Iddat Nikkah Case? - Rauf Hassan Told Everything - video Dailymotion

ARY NEWS

#SawalYehHai #RaufHassan #ImranKhan #BushraBibi #iddatCase #NikkahCase  Follow the ARY News channel on WhatsApp: https://bit.ly/46e5HzY  Subscribe to our channel and press the bell icon for latest news updates: http://bit.ly/3e0SwKP  ARY News is a leading Pakistani news channel that promises to bring you factual and timely international stories and stories about Pakistan, sports, entertainment, and business, amid others.  Official Facebook: https://www.fb.com/arynewsasia  Official Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/arynewsofficial  Official Instagram: https://instagram.com/arynewstv  Website: https://arynews.tv  Watch ARY NEWS LIVE: http://live.arynews.tv    Listen Live: http://live.arynews.tv/audio  Listen Top of the hour Headlines, Bulletins & Programs: https://soundcloud.com/arynewsofficial #ARYNews  ARY News Official YouTube Channel. For more videos, subscribe to our channel and for suggestions please use the comment section.

Transcript

00:00The video, the tweet, the statement is being owned and endorsed by the party.

00:07Along with this, some notices have also been sent by the FI.

00:10Mr. Rahul Hassan has also been called.

00:13Have you received the notice, Mr. Rahul Hassan?

00:15Yes, I have received it.

00:17What do you want to ask?

00:19They have given a small preliminary that the video that has been circulated on social media

00:25has created a lot of doubts regarding national security and national integrity.

00:31That is why I want to talk to you.

00:33You can come.

00:34They have called Burkh at 11 o'clock.

00:36I will go.

00:37Okay.

00:38Let's talk about one point at a time.

00:39First, we will talk about social media.

00:40But before that, I think you have expressed your doubts regarding Qazi Faiz Issa.

00:46Mr. Hamid Khan is not on board.

00:48He has a very clear opinion.

00:49He is saying that when there is a full court, it does not matter if one person is present.

00:53If there is a collective opinion, collective wisdom, then there is no harm in sitting with the Chief Justice.

00:57In a collective decision, every person has a vote.

01:00Every person contributes to it.

01:02So, definitely, their collective decision, they collect the individual decisions of all the people.

01:10So, Mr. Hamid Khan was not present in the court committee that day.

01:13He did not come.

01:14He did not attend.

01:15Maybe he was busy.

01:16So, the unanimous decision of the court committee…

01:18I mean, obviously, there was a request.

01:20There was a dissenting note.

01:23But by far, with a massive majority, he said that Qazi Faiz Issa should be on our case.

01:30What is the logic behind this?

01:31Because all the cases that we have seen so far, Qazi Faiz Issa is sitting on that bench.

01:35And legally, your legal team has never complained that he should be on this bench.

01:39So, why now?

01:40First, where are we?

01:41We requested Mr. Faiz Issa, the Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court and Mr. Faiz Issa

01:45to disassociate themselves.

01:47But they did not do it.

01:48I will give the answer to the basic reason that you have asked.

01:52We feel that since we have become the Chief Justice, we have not been getting justice.

01:59We were not getting justice even before that, for two years.

02:01But there are two or three things that bother us a lot.

02:05For example, we had moved a petition on 25th May regarding the 9th of May incidents.

02:10Today, it has been more than a year, but they have not even put it up.

02:13Similarly, we have not moved a petition on 8th of February.

02:17So, our petitions are not being put up.

02:19Apart from this, their statements are a certain bias.

02:23And I say this with utmost respect for the Office of the Chief Justice.

02:27That a kind of bias is reflected.

02:30So, they themselves wanted to disassociate themselves.

02:33That is obvious to you.

02:35Mr. Issa is very vocal in this regard.

02:36I just want to know, have you ever pleaded in written that your lawyer should not be on that bench in any case?

02:43I have not seen it.

02:45I have seen it with statements.

02:46I have seen it with statements many times.

02:47But have you ever pleaded legally in front of the court?

02:51No, not about the Chief Justice.

02:53But we have requested the Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court in writing that he should recuse himself.

02:59So, since you have become a full court now, and you are pleading on this occasion.

03:02So, I wanted to know, what was the thought process behind this?

03:04Because earlier, there were small benches.

03:06There was no full court.

03:07But you did not formally file a legal complaint on that.

03:10Are you going to file a legal complaint tomorrow?

03:13We handed over the legal committee.

03:15After the court committee's decision, the legal committee's input was taken.

03:19I do not know whether their input has been received till this moment or not.

03:22I think it should be received today, in any case, because tomorrow's case is pending.

03:25Who is heading the legal committee?

03:26The legal committee is headed by Mukhsit Yog.

03:28He is headed by Shabbir Faraz.

03:30He is running it.

03:31And all the advocates of our party are sitting in it.

03:37Mr. Hamid Khan is not in it.

03:38He is not in it.

03:39One more point.

03:40It is obvious that this is not the first time that such statements have been made about judges.

03:46In the past, PMLN has also made very clear statements.

03:48Campaigns have been run.

03:49Their pictures have also been circulated.

03:51So, this means that if someone's case is heard,

03:54if a judge is separated from a bench due to a political conflict of interest,

03:59then it will be a disaster.

04:00Then, in the future, the cases of PMLN, the cases of People's Party,

04:04everyone will say that they should hear it.

04:06So, this is right.

04:07This tradition should be followed.

04:08Then, the benches will be made.

04:09The tradition should be followed.

04:10I will be very honest with you.

04:11I don't feel that this is a good tradition.

04:13But unfortunately, the decisions that have come and are coming,

04:18we feel that there is a bias in it.

04:20A certain element of bias is present.

04:22And that is a very credible reason for us to request that you do us a favor.

04:26But that is a political conflict of interest.

04:28No, it is not a political conflict.

04:29These are decisions.

04:30Decisions are not based on a political basis.

04:32Decisions are based on law.

04:33There is no financial conflict of interest.

04:34There is no relationship.

04:35There is no such thing.

04:37This is a political conflict of interest.

04:39The slant of decisions forces us to request them.

04:43Then, in the future, every political party will say this.

04:45I want to decide this principally.

04:47What do you think?

04:48Leaving the biases aside.

04:50Then, in the future, there will be a case.

04:52Maryam Bibi, Nawaz Sharif will also stand up and say that

04:54there is no trust in this judge.

04:55So, this should not become a bench case.

04:57Any political leader can hold a meeting in the future and demand.

05:00Then, this will become a tradition.

05:01Look, in the case of Inder, you have heard the drama that took place that day.

05:05This judge was requested in writing that he should resign.

05:10He refused.

05:11So, after that, I am sure he was subjected to pressure.

05:14So, that day, he had to make a decision.

05:16But, instead of making a decision, he asked his lawyer to talk.

05:19Then, he asked Mr. Khawar Manekar to talk.

05:22Then, during the hearing in the court, he was expressed distrust.

05:28So, he said that he is resigning.

05:30So, this is the matter.

05:31This is a necessary matter.

05:32That day, we all knew what the judgment should be.

05:35Because, it was about marriage.

05:36But, in the past, PM Narendra Modi was also saying exactly this.

05:38We knew that Saqib Nisar was there.

05:39Which judgment will come?

05:40And, such judgments used to come.

05:43So, this is one.

05:44I just wanted to tell you that we have a lot of capacity to face adverse judgments.

05:50And, I think we have a lot of resilience to absorb them.

05:56But, if there are other such judgments,

05:59where there is a patently element of bias,

06:02then, I think, it is our professional right to request them to separate themselves.

06:07There are 13 judges sitting here.

06:08We can make 12 judges or anyone else the 13th judge.

06:10We have no problem.

06:11But, if they refuse, then, I think,

06:13I mean, so far as we look at it,

06:16the demands of justice will be met in a better way.

06:19This case was not televised.

06:21There is a big logic behind this.

06:25There are technical issues in it.

06:27You can find faults in it.

06:30But, the basic principle says that

06:32no one should be given the opportunity to make political statements

06:36by using the shoulder of the court.

06:39Is this principally wrong?

06:43Look, all kinds of cases go to the court.

06:46Political cases too.

06:47There are a lot of political cases now.

06:49I feel that it is a tradition.

06:50I personally feel that it is a tradition.

06:52Because, at the end of the day,

06:54the politicians themselves should solve the political cases.

06:57Parliament is a forum.

06:58But, unfortunately, because of reasons, you know,

07:00which will take a lot of time to describe,

07:02that is not the situation.

07:03So, everything that is landing here,

07:05is going to the court.

07:06This should not happen.

07:07But, political cases go to the court.

07:10And, politics definitely influences decisions.

07:13But, if a party leader is given the platform

07:17to present a political case,

07:19in which he will also talk about politics,

07:21again, this is a tradition.

07:23Should this be established?

07:24Because, in the future, not only this,

07:25in the future, it could be TLP,

07:26People's Party,

07:27PMLN.

07:28Then, this tradition should be…

07:30Ideally speaking,

07:31the court should not use the shoulder of the court.

07:34But, the court should not be used either.

07:36This is my very, very,

07:37sort of, two-pronged approach in this matter.

07:39The court should not be used either.

07:41Any one institution,

07:42or any other institution.

07:44At present, the major perception is that

07:46the judges of the court,

07:47who have already received the letter,

07:49the six judges of the Islamabad High Court,

07:51after that, as you know,

07:52the response of all the High Courts

07:54has been received,

07:55their input has been received.

07:56And, everyone has conceded that,

07:57yes, there is pressure.

07:58So, the court should adopt the mechanism

08:00that it should not be influenced

08:02by external pressure.

08:03And, it should make decisions

08:04according to the requirements of the law.

08:06Which, unfortunately, is not the case right now.

08:08You are painting an ideal situation.

08:09I totally agree with this.

08:10It should not happen.

08:11But, in that, the responsibility

08:12becomes the court's own.

08:15Mr. Khalid is not accepting that

08:17there is influence.

08:18He repeatedly says that

08:19there is no influence on us.

08:20And, those who cannot weather this influence,

08:22they say, you go home.

08:23So, I think that, for the court,

08:25especially for the Supreme Court of Pakistan,

08:27this is not a suitable approach.

08:29A mechanism should be set in which

08:31you free the court from influence.

08:33And, so that, according to the law,

08:35the decision is made.

08:36That is our understanding,

08:37our party's.

08:38Even mine, that it is not happening.

What's happened in Iddat Nikkah Case? - Rauf Hassan Told Everything

Category

Transcript

Recommended