US security advisor defends Pakistan on Osama
Washington, May 8 : Despite the shadow of the Osama episode affecting their ties, United States National Security Adviser Tom Donilon said there was no evidence to infer that Pakistan establishment was aware of Osama bin Laden hiding at Abbottabad before the US killed him in a covert action on May 2. Read more on New Kerala
Kuwait´s Prime Minister Addresses National Assembly; Lays Out Hopes for Cooperation
KUWAIT CITY, May 10, 2011 /PRNewswire/ His Highness the Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser Al-Mohammad Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah addressed Kuwait´s National Assembly today and urged lawmakers to move past differences between one another in an effort to end … Read more on wallstreet:online AG
US Official: Items Seized from bin Laden’s Compound, Biggest Ever
The national security adviser for the White House says the material seized from Osma bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan amounts to the largest cache of intelligence ever gathered from any single terrorist. Read more on KOLN Lincoln
US official says bin Laden information cache is largest ever derived from any single terrorist
WASHINGTON — The national security adviser for the White House says the material seized from Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan amounts to the largest cache of intelligence ever gathered from any single terrorist. National security adviser Tom Donilon (DAHN’-uh-lihn) says the CIA estimated the intelligence haul to be the size of a small college library. Donilon says the U.S. can’t consider … Read more on Washington Post
The Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms is all set to recommend a new procedure for the appointment of judges of the superior judiciary in line with the Charter of Democracy (CoD) when it meets next week.
Sources in the committee said that the present constitutional procedure for the appointment of judges in high courts and the Supreme Court will be replaced by a better system, which is being practised in some developed countries, including the United States.
Interestingly, the judges’ appointment system is being reviewed by the parliamentary committee at a time when the country has just witnessed a serious controversy over the judges appointment with the executive trying to over-step its limits to have its choice judges in the superior judiciary.
The proposed system as is reflected in the CoD would involve the judiciary, the executive and the legislature to appoint judges in the superior judiciary in a transparent manner, ensuring that no individual has arbitrary powers in this regard.
Although the committee would give final shape to these recommendations, a source said that draft recommendations prepared by Senator Raza Rabbani, who is also head of the constitutional reform committee, in line with the CoD in 2008 is the most serious work done so far on the issue. The source said that these draft recommendations suggest that the chief justice of Pakistan would be appointed by the president after consultation with the commission to be constituted under the Constitution while judges of the Supreme Court, high courts and the Federal Shariat Court would be appointed by the president in consultation with the chief justice and the commission. Consultation with the commission shall be binding on the president.
The commission, as referred above, would be called the Judicial Commission of Pakistan and would consist of the chief justice (chairman), two next most senior judges of the SC, four chief justices of the high courts, a member of the Pakistan Bar Council, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association in matter related to the SC, four president of the high court bar associations at the principal seats of the high courts in matters related to their respective high court, a MNA nominated by the prime minister, a MNA nominated by the opposition leader and four members of the Senate (one from each province to be nominated by the chairman Senate in consultation with the leader of the house and the leader of the opposition).
The commission shall forward a panel of three names in each vacancy (of a judge) to the prime minister, who shall forward one name to the joint parliamentary committee for confirmation of the nomination through a transparent public hearing.
The joint parliamentary committee shall comprise of 50 per cent members from the treasury benches and the remaining 50 per cent from the opposition parties based on their strength in parliament, to be nominated by respective parliamentary leaders.
After the appointment of the judges and their taking oath under the Constitution, taking of another oath subsequently (for example PCO) will automatically terminate the incumbent from the office of the chief justice or any other judge for such office as the case may be.
No change in the age of the Supreme Court or the high courts is expected. However, age for the appointment of high court judge would possibly be recommended to reduce from 45 to 40.
For the appointment of the acting chief justice, the senior most judge would be appointed as such. The ad hoc judges of the Supreme Court and additional judges of the high court would be appointed for a period not more than one year. The president’s power to transfer a high court judge from one high court to the other is also likely to be deleted.
The commission besides being involved in the appointment of judges, would also recommended to inquire into the conduct of a judge: a) If upon any matter inquired into by the commission there is a difference of opinion amongst its members, the opinion of the majority shall prevail and the report of the commission to the president would be expressed in terms of the view of the majority. b) If, on information received from any source, the chairman of the commission may or on the requisition of not less than one-fourth of the total membership of the commission, the chairman, shall direct the Inquiry Committee of the Commission to enquire into the capacity and conduct of a judge of the Supreme Court of high court as to whether he may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity or may have been guilty of misconduct.
On receipt of the report of inquiry committee the commission would consider the matter and make appropriate recommendations to the president. On receipt of the recommendation from the Commission to the effect that the Judge is incapable of performing the duties of his office or has been guilty of misconduct the President shall remove the judge from the office. A judge of the Supreme Court and high court shall not be removed from the office except as provided under this Article.
The commission shall issue a code of conduct to be observed by the Judges of the Supreme Court and high courts. Although the CoD also reflects on the setting up of a constitutional court, this proposal is not expected to get through the parliamentary committee owing to the changed situation following the restoration of the judiciary and because of the fact that the system of constitutional court is not practiced by most of the countries including the most developed nations.
Beds Factory one stop for quality beds, mattress and Mattresses.
In the early eighties Michael Badnarik started his career as a computer programmer at an Illinois nuclear power plant. For the past twenty years he has continued this professional course, but during this time he became interested and frustrated with politics. As a result, in 1983 Badnarik began studying the IRS and then the constitution. He had since condensed his 18 years of research into a short eight hour course that he would teach in a lecture format. It included some of the fundamentals on our rights and the foundations of our republic. A video recording of one of the classes has been made and you can watch it here..
Australia and Pakistan move to Sydney – the venue that caused much heartburn in Pakistan after the second Test – for the second ODI. While Australia will have fond memories of the ground where they pulled off an improbable and stunning win at the start of the year, Pakistan will be eager to erase the bitter memories that the Test left them with. A number of players on both sides are common to the ODI and Test sides, and with not even a month being over since that match, there is no dangers of memories running short.
Both sides are aware, that the ODIs will provide for a much more equal platform for competition than the Test matches did, and that showed in the first ODI, where Pakistan put up a challenging total, and Australia needed Cameron White to play an outstanding innings to take them home.
Pakistan have always been the most mercurial of sides, and several of their problems have arisen from in-fighting and disunity, but there is one thing that has united Pakistan teams across the ages, and that is playing against India. They may not be facing India on the field, but with all the off-field controversy about the IPL auctions, and the collective rejection of the players, the team is likely to be a more unified force than it has been at any point in the Australian tour. Shahid Afridi, in particular, seems to have taken the snub to heart, and it showed in his batting in the first ODI, when he blasted 48 off 26 balls. His ODI average is in the low twenties, but he continues to be the main man in Pakistan’s limited-overs plans with his ability to turn matches with bat and ball.
Pakistan also need young Umar Akmal to exhibit the temperament that, allied to his undoubted talent, will bring forth the next world-beating batsman. The only spot of bother in the batting order seems to be Younis Khan, who pottered around for 46 painful runs in the first ODI. However, the time spent in the middle, and the freedom from team politics and decisions since renouncing theh captaincy, could be just what was required for Younis to rediscover his touch. The bowling was a bit wayward, with excellent first spells by Asif and Aamer being negated, but the talent in the bowling lineup cannot be questioned. It is only a matter of harnessing it, and if they do that, Pakistan could give Australia a good run for their money.
Australia, on the other hand, showed just why they have been so dominant in the ODI format and why they hold the No.1 ranking by a comfortable margin. Although they were made to scrap initially, they found a man for the job and eventually won without any discomfort. It was Cameron White in the first ODI, but Australia have always managed to find a man for the job in crunch situations. This was much in evidence in their ODI series against India late last year, where they won despite fielding an almost second-string side. The in-born Aussie competitiveness and toughness has stood them in good stead and they seem to be able to draw on reserves of determination and self-belief that other teams just don’t have. Their only real worry is the form of Ricky Ponting. The skipper has been noticeably short of runs throughout the summer, notwithstanding his double century in the third Test. Even in the first ODI, he looked to be struggling and not fully at ease. However, the old adage of form being temporary and class permanent holds true, and Pakistan will ignore Ponting as a batting force at their peril.
Teams: Australia (From): Shaun Marsh, Shane Watson, Ricky Ponting(c), Michael Clarke, Cameron White, Michael Hussey, Brad Haddin(w), Nathan Hauritz, Clint McKay, Doug Bollinger, Peter Siddle, James Hopes, Adam Voges
Pakistan (From): Salman Butt, Kamran Akmal(w), Younis Khan, Mohammad Yousuf(c), Umar Akmal, Shoaib Malik, Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Aamer, Umar Gul, Saeed Ajmal, Mohammad Asif, Naved-ul-Hasan, Fawad Alam, Imran Farhat, Iftikhar Anjum, Khalid Latif, Sarfraz Ahmed
