"Better Musharaff than a democratically elected Osama Bin Laden disciple. This is inalienable right of people of Pakistan to democratically elect who ever they want even if it is osama bin Laden's deciple."

Very true. Just like the Germans did in the 1930s with Hitler.

They paid the price of that choice with over 9 million German deaths, so don't complain if history repeats itself...

George, Aix-en-Provence,

Pakistan came into being as the result of a democratic movement.Like India,it inherited vibrant institutions from the English at the time of independence in 1947.Perceived insecurity led to weakening and then demise of all its institutions except for the army,which became the greatest vested interest and has ruled the country directly for most of its life and indirectly during the remaining period.Sixty years after independence,exhaustive debate among our greatest legal minds has led to the finding that a serving general who seized power more than seven years ago is eligible to contest election to the office of President in a "democratic"election.
Perhaps the nation has really lost its ability to govern itself.Perhaps the sole purpose of having a judiciary is to find justification for army rule.Perhaps the founding fathers did not know that Pakistan would never be a politically viable state.

Afzal A. Neseem, Lincoln, Nebraska

The job of the Supreme court is to interpret law and make ruling within the framework of the constitution and the law.
The job of the national assembly is to make or amend existing laws. Like the law of death sentence can be abolshid by the assembly and not the Supreme Court.
The Judges hands were tied by the National assembly supported by MMA made the amendment to give president Pervez Musharraf legitimacy.
Th law has nothing to do with aspirations of the people.

syed ahmed, Dallas, USA

Shaffiq Mahmood, Halifax, UK:

Yes.

Judiciary works in our portion of Kashmir and Nagaland.

Pakistan's controlled Kashmir does not have even have a proper democracy. Shias want a separate homeland!

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

At least a portion of the judiciary should work in Kashmir, considering it is in Pakistan controlled area of Kashmir.
The military has and always will be a integral part of Pakistani administration, democratically elec ted officials will always have to look over their shoulder as to when they could be dismissed if the military does not approve of them.
Sad state of affairs of our friends in the "frontline state in the war against terror"
M George, Houston Texas USA

M George, Houston, US

This carries an eerie resemblance of the Malaysian constitutional crisis in 1988. *goosebumps*

Phoon, K.L., Malaysia

'Does it make any difference? Pakistan has always been ruled by the military. Better Musharaff than a democratically elected Osama Bin Laden disciple.'
This is inalienable right of people of Pakistan to democratically elect who ever they want even if it is osama bin Laden's deciple. Neo Con imperialists like Bush, the war criminal responsible for death of over a million people would off course like to have a poodle in charge in pakistan to do his bidding ,but remember his days are numberd.

Mahmood, London, UK

Does the judiciary work in Kashmir and Nagaland. Indians are in no position to preach.

Shaffiq Mahmood, Halifax, UK

Does the judiciary work in Pakistan? Is it another kangaroo court?
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

Does it make any difference? Pakistan has always been ruled by the military. Better Musharaff than a democratically elected Osama Bin Laden disciple.

Sreedhar.G., Bangalore, India