Supreme courts judgement of july 31, 2009

On this fateful day the supreme court of Pakistan declared that taking oath under the PCO (provisional constitutional order) is illegal, so what musharraf did November 3, 2007 was illegal. For those of you who do not know, whenever a PCO has been declared, the judiciary is required to take oath under the provisional constitution order. The provisional constitutional order says that no court will pass judgement against PCO.

In short, the judiciary has to agree on taking oath of office under PCO, which the judiciary did.

One big question that arises from this decision of Supreme court is that why is this decision of the supreme court only being applied to the act of November 3, 2007? If this ruling of the supreme court is being applied retrospectively,which is of no use in the first place, then why selectively?

Why isn't it being applied to the Provisional constitution order of 2000, 1999 and 1981( declared by General Zia ul haq on March 24, 1981)?

Nearly every member of the nowadays 14 member bench has taken oath under PCO in the past. Aren't they all guilty now?

Many people debated what repercussions would entail and the ease with which the supreme court passed this decision because this decision invalidates the legislative work of the provincial and national assemblies.

Not only that but 34 judges of the Lahore high court lost their jobs on account of this historic ruling because they took oath under a PCO Chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar but another group of judges remains intact. The july 31 ruling protects the appointment of Justice Sardar raza khan, justice shakir ullah khan, justice tassaduq hussain jillani, justice saqib nasir

and many others under this category.

Is not this Discrimination?