Moazzam Ali Khan, What proof do you have got from ISI about Indian and other agencies money? Secondly those lawyers who have no citizenship of Pakistan, but advocating for it, if this so-called Halal is not for money then for what? Halal money (which you have mentioned) can be earned only by speaking truth and should not be based on lies. Blood-shed (which you have mentioned) stains in Pakistan and Pakistani occupied Gilgit-Baltistan are visible on the hands of ISI Headquarters, Zero Point, Islamabad, which has been many times proved by Pakistanis themselves and on international level. ISI and Pakistani forces have been engaged in the blood-shedding of the indigenous people of GB, since 1974 after abolition of indigenous system of rule in Gilgit-Baltistan. Who made blood-shed in 1988?- that was Pakistan Army. Who made bloodshed of Agha Zia-Ud-Din and ISI and Who blood-shedded thousands of innocent people on KKH and other parts of PoGB?- Pakistan. The people of GB are victims of Pakistani Army, ISI, its Rangers, FC, Judiciary and Police. Mr. Lawyer, the people of GB don’t have the right of impartial judiciary for remedy and you are silent. The people of GB donâ€™t have legal and impartial justice system and you lawyers are presenting yourself in such courts for money. You have earlier mentioned about one â€˜Articleâ€™ of Pakistani constitution but you failed to mention what the people of GB have to do with that Pakistani act or article. All the articles in Pakistani constitution except â€˜Article 257â€™- related to J&K including PoGB (Pakistan occupied Gilgit-Baltistan) says:- When the people of the State of Jammu & Kashmir decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and the State shall be determined
in accordance with the wishes of the people of that State.
Moazzam Sahib, Can you or any other lawyer tell us why the name of Gilgit-Baltistan has not been mentioned here in this Pakistani â€˜Article 257â€™. Secondly, this Article also shows the lies and duplicity of Pakistan. Otherwise, it would have mentioned that. Which procedure (fair and impartial elections/referendum) shall determine the relation with Pakistan and if not (in case, if people do not vote for Pakistan) then what will be the next? According to the above Article, there are only two options. In the UNCIP resolutions of 28th April 1949, which was suggested by Pakistan and followed by India, the options are to vote for either Pakistan or India, there is no third option. Do you think that under the Pakistani occupation the people of J&K and GB can vote freely without any threat or bribe etc? If this happens, how international community and UN will accept the results of such bogus votes under Pakistani forces? Mr. Lawyer, have you ever shown your courage to come out on why Pakistanis are declaring political and religious people as terrorists and why a single terrorist has not been punished so far. Why anti-terrorism courts have been established without any terrorist organizations under their purview and why the people of PoGB only are given death sentences without legal judicial process?- (Laws are bound to constitution and without constitution, there is no sense of law) in which they would have the right to appeal in High Court and Supreme Court and finally to the President. Why lawyers like you have accepted a Retired ISI Hawaldar like Haq Nawaz as Judge of court to give punishment to the indigenous people of GB on the directions/instigations of ISI? Moazzam sahib, please give me answers in detail by giving reference of your law books.
Please read the extract of â€˜UNCIP Resolutionsâ€™ given below or visit www.balawaristan.com :-
1. â€œAs the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from the Stateâ€
2.â€The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fightingâ€
3.â€œPending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commissionâ€.
Part II of the truce terms dealt with the withdrawal of troops from the territory of the State. Following the principles embodied in part II of the 13 August resolution; the Commission established the schedules of withdrawal of the Pakistan troops and the bulk of the Indian forces. In its covering letter to the Indian Government (Annex 22), the Commission submitted a plan for the withdrawal of the bulk of the Indian forces from the State. This suggestion was made in conformity with the terms of paragraph B, 1 of part II, which stipulated that the bulk of the Indian forces would be withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, in stages, to be agreed between the Government of India and the Commission.
Part III of the truce terms contained various general provisions:
(a) â€œIt established that “the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the legal authorities under the surveillance of the Commission”;
(b) â€œIt provided that immediately upon the acceptance of these terms, the Commission would enter into consultations with the Government of India regarding the disposal of the Indian and State armed forces, and with the local authorities regarding the disposal of the armed forces in the territory to be evacuated by Pakistan troops,
with a view to initiating implementation of point 4 (a) and (b) of the Commission’s resolution of 5 January 1949″
(c) â€œOther provisions were made for the release of prisoners of war and for the publicity to be given throughout
the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the fact that peace, law and order would be safeguarded and that all human and political rights would be guaranteed. The truce terms also provided that they should be without prejudice to the territorial integrity and the sovereignty of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.