PTI News, Updates and Discussion

[VCheng]

And you have been factually proven wrong on both counts

As I said, please carry on as you wish.

 

[Watandar]

As I said, please carry on as you wish.

Thank you. Have a nice day.

 

[VCheng]

To the larger question (more likely dodge) on whether this single case can be indicative of the whole judicial system of Pakistan and every other politician, the answer would obviously No. Every case is different and the history of the Pakistani judiciary is available in front of us.

Either one believes in the integrity of ALL court verdicts and elections results, or NONE of them.

One cannot pick and choose only the ones that one agrees with.

That is all.

 

[hnn]

I provided the facts about Mr Khan's acquittal and the legal process. This was to disprove claims he was a criminal in that case.

To the larger question (more likely dodge) on whether this single case can be indicative of the whole judicial system of Pakistan and every other politician, the answer would obviously No. Every case is different and the history of the Pakistani judiciary is available in front of us.

As are the lawfare strategies of the Establishment.

So then if an individual verdict from a judicial court acquits an accused then we should respect that verdict and take that as fact? If I go by that logic than same as IK, other politicians have been acquitted in legal cases which would mean I shall take them as "not guilty" - which means none of them are criminals - and since FM of today can not even be presented in front of a judicial court I now have to take it as a fact that he is not guilty of anything

 

[Watandar]

Either one believes in the integrity of ALL court verdicts and elections results, or NONE of them.

One cannot pick and choose only the ones that one agrees with.

That is all.

That an impossible standard that even established democracies in Europe or North America cannot meet. Every court case is different, and can possibly be overturned on appeal. Each election is certified individually and disputes resolved either politically or in court.

It's even more absurd to declare this about Pakistan, a country with a history of coups, weak rule of law, weak and compromised institutions.

If you disagree so strongly with Imran Khan acquittal in cipher case, maybe you can provide some evidence that you only seem to possess and that we can try the case again?

 

[hnn]

To the larger question (more likely dodge) on whether this single case can be indicative of the whole judicial system of Pakistan and every other politician, the answer would obviously No. Every case is different and the history of the Pakistani judiciary is available in front of us.

It isn't about drawing a general indication about "anything" from one case.

Here's the logical tension I'm facing with it. You have presented me with a verdict for IK's legal case that acquits him of the guilty charge against him. Now similar verdicts are available for other politicians. Why should I believe the verdict in IK's case is genuine lawfully while not genuine lawfully for other politicians?

 

[Watandar]

So then if an individual verdict from a judicial court acquits an accused then we should respect that verdict and take that as fact? If I go by that logic than same as IK, other politicians have been acquitted in legal cases which would mean I shall take them as "not guilty" - which means none of them are criminals - and since FM of today can not even be presented in front of a judicial court I now have to take it as a fact that he is not guilty of anything

You can take Imran Khan's acquittal in the cipher case only as fact.

The rest of what you wrote is sophistry.

 

[VCheng]

It's even more absurd to declare this about Pakistan, a country with a history of coups, weak rule of law, weak and compromised institutions.

Agreed. So NONE of the court verdicts really matter much, especially the higher court verdicts.

 

[VCheng]

You can take Imran Khan's acquittal in the cipher case only as fact.

But I cannot take all his other convictions as similar facts?

LOL.

 

[hnn]

That an impossible standard that even established democracies in Europe or North America cannot meet. Every court case is different, and can possibly be overturned on appeal. Each election is certified individually and disputes resolved either politically or in court.

But as long as an acquittal verdict isn't overuled by another verdict - the first one stays in place. So as per that NS and current PM are not criminals either.

The rest of what you wrote is sophistry.

It's not sophistry but a logical conclusion to the premise provided by yourself i.e. "if there's an acquittal verdict it becomes a fact" - and so it becomes a fact for everyone then not just one person so as of now no politician are actually criminal and hate against them is not justified

 

[Watandar]

It isn't about drawing a general indication about "anything" from one case.

Here's the logical tension I'm facing with it. You have presented me with a verdict for IK's legal case that acquits him of the guilty charge against him. Now similar verdicts are available for other politicians. Why should I believe the verdict in IK's case is genuine lawfully while not genuine lawfully for other politicians?

Your "logical tension" may be the result of you thinking of court cases as being manufactured in some factory in Faisalabad.

Each court case in every legal system in the world is different. There are additional variables in the Pakistani environment.

 

[Watandar]

But as long as an acquittal verdict isn't overuled by another verdict - the first one stays in place. So as per that NS and current PM are not criminals either.



It's not sophistry but a logical conclusion to the premise provided by yourself i.e. "if there's an acquittal verdict it becomes a fact" - and so it becomes a fact for everyone then not just one person so as of now no politician are actually criminal and hate against them is not justified

Its sophistry because I provided facts about one case about one politician, which you then take to mean that every case about every politician in Pakistan must be the same!! Which is illogical.

Since you neither have logic nor facts but rely on language and mockery , you are engaged in sophistry.

 

[hnn]

Your "logical tension" may be the result of you thinking of court cases as being manufactured in some factory in Faisalabad.

Each court case in every legal system in the world is different. There are additional variables in the Pakistani environment.

But all "VERDICTS" have same legal value and that is not a rule made in a factory in Faisalabad

 

[VCheng]

I provided facts about one case about one politician, which you then take to mean that every case about every politician in Pakistan must be the same!! Which is illogical.

It is the SAME court system.

It would be logical to either trust it, or NOT.

To pick and choose would be utterly HYPOCRITICAL.

 

[hnn]

Its sophistry because I provided facts about one case about one politician, which you then take to mean that every case about every politician in Pakistan must be the same!! Which is illogical.

Since you neither have logic nor facts but rely on language and mockery , you are engaged in sophistry.

It is not about the "case" but the "final verdict" - every final verdict has the same legal value and it's not something difficult to understand because that is a legal fact which you can deny to acknowledge.

The ad hominems doesn't help your argument either