A notorious official notification of Government of Pakistan of 9th March 2007 made the Chief Justice of Pakistan "non-functional". But very soon it transpired that, there is no such term as "non-functional", and no Chief Justice can be designated as "Non-functional Chief Justice" under any article of the Constitution of the country.
All and sundry in a deafening way brought the issue home. And the confused and confounded Government very discretely accepted the fact that, the post "non-functional chief justice" has no place under the Constitution. So, again in a queer move, the 'aqalmand' Government sent the Chief Justice to forced leave with retrospective effect.
This means that, the Chief Justice is on forced leave from the very day of the coup, that is 9th March 2007. This action, though itself is highly questionable established the fact beyond doubt that, the Chief Justice was not, is not and cannot be "non-functional."
Then why all the media, particularly the private TV channels call him "Non-functional Chief Justice" when he is not non-functional even by government standard? By doing so, are not they violating or desecrating the Constitution? What they can say, at the very best, in my opinion, is to say "the Chief Justice on forced leave", which would be at least nearer to the Government stand, if not constitutional in spirit?
But who would make them realise this simple fact? It seems that concerned people consider it a constitutional question, and should be taken to Supreme Court bench through some petition for clarification. But why? Why cannot common sense be used in deciding such already decided trivial issues?
Under the given circumstances, it sounds ludicrous to say "Non-functional Chief Justice". Our media should immediately stop this.