Daily Times

Sir: The detailed judgement of the controversial ‘PM’s contempt of court’ case has been issued. Unfortunately, to a logical, non-legal mind, regarding the question of the immunity clause, the judgement fails to give a reasonable explanation. From studying the judgement, it seems that this point and other aspects of it are assumptive and assertive and the crux of the problem lies not in itself, but in taking the orders of the NRO judgement as its base, which was actually flawed in several ways. Though at the time that judgement was passed, such hype was built up publicly that nobody dared — not even the attorney general — to take up the matter. The judgement of the review petition of the NRO judgement was passed in the same ethos. However, what is disconcerting about the judgement of the contempt case are the insertions (even poetic) regarding morality. Morality is capable of subjective interpretation and can be used for manipulation. The law is clearly defined and not pliable one way or the other (please note that I am referring to the letter of the law and not the legal process, which I have seen that people do manage to manipulate sometimes). Therefore, as a layman, my understanding is that a judgement should stick to the law only.

IMRAN KURESHI

Karachi