ISLAMABAD: Sceptics had doubted if the Constitutional reforms committee would ever finish its work, pundits had claimed the amendment would never be tabled and doomsday prophets insisted all along that even if tabled the Bill would never be ‘allowed’ to pass. But it all happened on Thursday and the first step in a historic achievement was taken when the National Assembly unanimously passed the 18th Amendment Bill, restoring the Constitution to a near-1973 complexion by undoing various undemocratic amendments pushed through by military dictators who had illegally forced their way into the power corridors.
From political cosmetics to fundamental righting of wrongs, the amendments had it all, including the removal of dictator General Ziaul Haq’s name from the Constitution, declaring General Musharraf’s coup of October 12, 1999 as illegal and unlawful, nullifying the Legal Framework Order 2002. In all, the amendment has amended 102 clauses.
The 18th Amendment Bill was approved by 292 votes in favour through division of the House. The House passed the bill containing 102 clauses, rejecting a few objections moved by the members regarding the Concurrent List, renaming the NWFP, intra-party elections and women seats in the House and within parties.
The House started its proceedings at 11am and passed the bill clause-by-clause, concluding the process at 6:35pm. Adviser to the PM Mian Raza Rabbani moved the bill on behalf of all the parliamentary parties who held representation in the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms. The House passed the bill through division of votes made to determine the actual number of votes in favour and against the amendment.
The parliamentarians celebrated the passage of the 102-clause bill with a prolonged thumping of desks. “It is a matter of celebration for all the democratic parties. Feelings of joy are visible in the House. This is a historic day for all of us,” Speaker Dr Fehmida Mirza said, while announcing the third reading of the bill.
A joyous parliament had received the much-awaited proposals for the landmark constitutional reforms last Friday that restored its lost power and a genuine parliamentary system after its repeated mutilation by military dictators.
Some members of the House, who differed with certain clauses of the bill during the second reading, also voted in favour on the final stage that made the passage of the bill possible with a consensus.
Overall, 292 votes were counted during the division of votes in the final phase, all favouring the bill, which was more than a two-thirds majority — prerequisite for a constitutional amendment.
The House debated the bill for three days and a number of MPs from all parties took part in the discussion and termed it a landmark achievement. The PPP legislators raised slogans of ‘Jiye Bhutto’ with loud desk thumping for a couple of minutes when the House adopted clause 95 of the bill with 276 votes against none that erases the name of General Ziaul Haq from the Constitution.
The PML-N parliamentarians raised full-throated slogans of ‘hang Musharraf’ right after the House passed clause 96, which pertains to declared proclamation of the October 1999 PCO and LFO by Musharraf, as having been made without lawful authority and no legal effect. The sloganeering continued for a couple of minutes. The clause was passed by 273 to nil votes.
Clause 3 of the bill regarding change in the name of the NWFP to Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa faced opposition from parliamentarians hailing from the Hazara region and other members of the PML-Q. The clause, however, was passed with 264 votes favouring it against 20 opposing it. In a big deviation from their party’s policy, some PML-N members — Captain Safdar (son-in-law of Nawaz Sharif), Sardar Mehtab Khan, Murtaza Javed Abbasi, Sardar Muhammad Mushtaq and Sahibzada Fazal Karim — did not vote and left the House. Other MNAs from Hazara division, Farzana Mushtaq and Shah Jahan Khan from the PML-Q and Laiq Muhammad Khan of the JUI-F, also opposed the new name of the NWFP.
The House rejected two amendments moved by Marvi Memon and Shah Jahan Khan in the clause. Speaking against the new name, PML-Q’s Amir Muqaam said the people of Hazara are being punished for being Pakistani, adding the move had created unrest among them.
Farzana Mushtaq said giving a new name to the province had buried the ideology of Pakistan.
She said the National Awami Party’s top leader did not salute the Pakistani flag at the time of partition in 1947. “They wanted to make ‘Pakhtunistan’ as part of India,” she said. She said the people of Hazara are now demanding a new province.
Marvi Memon said it is only the PML-Q which took a stand against this clause. Kashmala Tariq said all people of the province should be taken on board before making changes in name of the NWFP.
Rejecting the amendments, Raza Rabbani said a new province could be created by changing boundaries of an existing province if the concerned provincial assembly passes it with a two-thirds majority.
Surprisingly, PML-N’s Makhdoom Javed Hashmi and Khawaja Saad Rafique were among the six parliamentarians who voted against clause 6 of the amendment bill which pertains to substitution of Article 17 of the Constitution.
Kashmala Tariq of the PML-Likeminded moved an amendment in this clause. She strongly objected to omission of a clause of Article 17 which says that every political party shall, subject to law, hold intra-party elections to elect its office-bearers and party leaders. She said the omission of this clause would promote dictatorship and inheritance in political parties. Israr Tarin and Riaz Fatiyana also voted against Clause 6 of the bill.
Kashmala Tariq, while moving amendments in some clauses, time and again targeted Raza Rabbani. “I have decided to refrain from giving any response on today’s historic day but I reserve my right to react some other day,” Raza Rabbani responded on the floor of the House.
The House rejected another amendment moved by Kashmala in clause 16 in which she wanted that a woman parliamentarian elected twice on reserved seats should be given tickets by their parties to directly contest general elections.
As the bill was unanimously passed, Ahsan Iqbal snubbed a young parliamentarian from the PPP who was raising slogans in favour of President Asif Ali Zardari. “The bill has been passed with consensus, so why are you raising such slogans,” Ahsan said.
The 17th clause of the bill provides that the president could only dissolve the National Assembly on the advice of the prime minister.
The assembly also passed a clause regarding repealing of Article 58 of the Constitution that bars the president to dissolve the National Assembly on his own.
Another amendment was proposed by Kashmala Tariq in clause 6 of the bill suggesting that the heads of political parties should be elected through an electoral process besides enhancing representation of women in parliament. The House rejected these amendments with a majority.
The National Assembly also passed an amendment in Article 153 of the Constitution which provides reconstitution of Council of Common Interests with the prime minister as its chairman.
It has also been made obligatory for the council to meet at least once in 90 days to resolve the contentious issues between the federating units.
The House also adopted an amendment in the Constitution to change the procedure for the appointment of judges of the superior courts.
Under this provision, the judges would now be nominated by a judicial commission headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan while final approval of the appointment would be made by a parliamentary committee consisted of parliamentarians.
The House also passed amendment in Article 213 of the Constitution which provides that the prime minister in consultation with the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly would forward three names for the appointment of the chief election commissioner to a parliamentary committee for hearing and confirmation of any one person from them.
Under clause 90 of the amendment bill, the powers to appoint services chiefs has been delegated to the prime minister which was earlier prerogative of the president. However, the president will remain supreme commander of the Armed Forces.
Under clause 71 of the bill a high court for Islamabad Capital Territory has been proposed besides setting up of benches of Peshawar High Court at Mingora and Balochistan High Court at Turbat.
The 18th Amendment Bill has also provided more provincial autonomy to the provinces through diverting resources to the federating units, allowing to explore natural resources, establish power generation units and get royalty on natural resources.
After passage of the 18th Amendment Bill from the Lower House, it has now been transmitted to the Senate for its consideration which will take it tomorrow.
Online adds: The National Assembly passed clause 15 with 274 votes, making it binding on the prime minister to take consent of the joint session of the Parliament before holding a referendum.
To increase the Senate seats from the present 100 to 104, the Lower House passed the clause 18 with 278 with no vote against it. Working days of the Upper House have also been augmented to 110 from 90 days with the approval of clause 19 with 279 votes.
The National Assembly also passed clauses 21 and 22 for amendments in Articles 62 and 63 that relate to the eligibility and ineligibility of the members of the Parliament.
Clause 23 was passed with 281 votes, which states that the joint session of the Parliament will approve a bill in case divergence persists on the bill in the National Assembly and the Senate. he House also passed clauses 25 and 26 with 280 votes while 281 votes were cast in favour of clause 27, which bars the president to promulgate any ordinance when the Senate and the National Assembly are in session.
The House passed another important clause 28 which states that the president will be symbol of the Federation and on the name of the president, the prime minister and the federal government will exercise all the state powers.
To end bar on third-time premiership, the House endorsed clause 29 with 282 votes against nil. It also approved clause 30 to curtail the size of the cabinet, which will be eleven percent of the total size of the Parliament under the 18th Amendment.
The Lower House also imposed bar on the attorney general to do private practice by passing clause 32.
`The house further empowering the office of the prime minister passed clause 33 for amendment in article 101, under which the president will appoint provincial governors on the advice of the prime minister.
The House passed clause 37 unanimously under which a governor will only dissolve the assembly on the advice of the chief minister and assemblies will stand dissolved in 48 hours after the receipt of advice. Clauses 38, 39, 40,41 and 42 were endorsed to restrict the governor not to re-promulgate ordinance more than once besides increasing the working days of provincial assemblies from 70 to 100 days.
For the devolution of power at the grassroots level, the National Assembly passed clause 48 for the establishment of local governments in all the four provinces.
Members of the Lower House also approved clause 50 to abolish the Concurrent List. The House unanimously approved clauses 59,60 and 61 under which share of provinces in the new NFC will not be reduced from the previous one.
(The News: 9 April 2010)
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Constitutional Reforms package tabled in parliament
ISLAMABAD: Friday turned out to be a red letter day in the parliamentary history of Pakistan when Mian Raza Rabbani presented report of the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms in the National Assembly, which seeks to revive the Constitution in its democratic shape by repealing all amendments and distortions introduced by military rulers, including the Legal Framework Order 2002.
It also seeks to transform the Prime Minister’s House into the epicentre of power, devolution of power from the Centre to the federating units and safety valve for the protection of democracy by recommending that suspension and holding of the Constitution in abeyance should be declared an act of high treason under Article 6 of the Constitution.
In all, the parliamentary committee’s report contains 100 recommendations to restore the 1973 Constitution in its original form. As Mian Raza Rabbani concluded his presentation, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and members from both sides of the isle hugged him.
Soon after presenting the report in the National Assembly, Rabbani moved to the Senate to present the report in the Upper House of parliament after which the sessions of both the houses were prorogued.
Opposition Leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and Law Minister Dr Babar Awan were conspicuous by their absence on this historic occasion. Highlighting the main features of the report, Raza Rabbani said the committee has recommended that parliament should declare the 17th Amendment to the Constitution and the Legal Framework Order (LFO) given by a dictator as without any legal authority and should be repealed.
It has also been recommended that the NWFP should be renamed as ‘Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa’. It has also been recommended that Article 58-2(b) of the Constitution should also be repealed.
The committee has recommended that for good governance the size of the cabinet should be restricted to 11 per cent of the members of parliament and this should also hold good for the provinces.
It has also been recommended that four seats, one from each province, should be allocated in the Senate for the minorities to increase their strength. It has been recommended that education to each child up to the age of 16 years be made compulsory.
It has been proposed that the formation of the council of common interests should be revised with prime minister as its chairman. The council should meet at least once in 90 days besides abolition of the Concurrent List.
It is proposed in Article 46 of the Constitution that the prime minister shall keep the president informed on all matters of internal and foreign policy and on all legislative proposals the federal government intends to bring before the Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament).
The committee proposed that the president could use the power of dissolution of the National Assembly when a vote of no-confidence having been passed against the prime minister, no other member of the National Assembly commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, as ascertained in a session of the National Assembly for the purpose.
The committee proposed insertion of Article 10(A) which says: For the determination of his civil rights and obligations or in any criminal charge against him a person shall be entitled to a fair trial and due process.
In Article 27, it is proposed that under-representation of any class or area in the service of Pakistan may be redressed in such manner as may be determined by an act of Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament).
A bar was imposed on the attorney general for doing private practice. The recommendations also include that inexpensive and expeditious justice should be ensured to the people as also the right of access to information without any hurdle.
Election Commission: According to the proposed amendment in Article 203C of the Constitution, the prime minister shall, in consultation with the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, forward three names for appointment of the chief election commissioner to a parliamentary committee for hearing and confirmation of any one person.
The parliamentary committee, to be constituted by the speaker, shall comprise 50 per cent from the opposition parties, based on their strength in Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament) to be nominated by the respective parliamentary leaders.
The proposed amendment further states provided in case there is no consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition, each shall forward separate lists to the parliamentary committee for consideration, which may confirm one name.
The total strength of the parliamentary committee shall not exceed 12 members out of which one-third shall be from the Senate. Provided that when the National Assembly is dissolved and a vacancy occurs in the office of the chief election commissioner, the parliamentary committee shall comprise the members of the Senate only.
Terms of prime minister: It has been proposed that there shall be no restriction on the number of terms for the offices of the prime minister and chief ministers. Appointment of services chiefs: According to an amendment proposed in Article 243 of the Constitution, the prime minister would advise the president on appointment of the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee and chiefs of three armed forces.
The Senate: According to an amendment proposed in Article 59 of the Constitution, the Senate shall consist of 104 instead of 100 with the addition of one minority member from each province. As per amendment proposed in Article 61, the working days of the Senate have been increased from 90 to 110.
Disqualification for membership of Majlis-e-Shoora: According to the amendment proposed in Article 63 of the Constitution, the restriction on a person who has been dismissed from the service of Pakistan, service of a corporation or office set up or controlled by the federal government or the provincial government on ground of misconduct has been lifted. According to this amendment, a person could be elected as MP, three or five years after dismissal from the service.
According to the amendment, a person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as, and from being, a member of parliament if he has been dismissed from the service of Pakistan or service of a corporation or office set up or, controlled, by the federal government, the provincial government or a local government on ground of misconduct, unless a period of five years since his removal or dismissal; or unless a period of three years has elapsed since his removal or compulsory retirement.
The restriction on a person being elected as member of parliament, who has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for propagating any opinion, or acting in any manner, prejudicial to the ideology of Pakistan, or the sovereignty, integrity or security of Pakistan, or integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan, or which defames or bring into ridicule the judiciary or the armed forces of Pakistan, unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. (Interior Minister Rehman Malik would benefit from amendment in Article 63 as he was dismissed from government service in 1998-1999).
The proposed amendment would also benefit PML-N leaders who were disqualified as being members of parliament for being involved in attack on the Supreme Court building. They include Mian Munir, Chaudhry Tanvir, Sardar Naseem, Tariq Aziz, Chaudhry Akhtar Rasool and others.
Public service commission: Chairman of the Federal Public Service Commission would be appointed by the president on the advice of the prime minister. Similarly, chairmen of the provincial public service commissions would be appointed by the governors on the advice of chief ministers.
Proclamation of emergency: Under proposed amendment in Article 232 of the Constitution, the proclamation of emergency in the province due to internal disturbances would require a resolution from the provincial assembly.
Provided further that if the president acts on his own the proclamation of emergency shall be placed before both houses of parliament for approval by each house within 10 days.
Caretaker prime minister: On dissolution of the assembly or completion of its term, or in case it is dissolved under Article 58 or Article 112, a caretaker shall be selected by the president in consultation with the prime minister and the leader of the opposition in the outgoing National Assembly. Similarly, a caretaker chief minister will be appointed in consultation with the chief minister and the leader of the opposition in the outgoing provincial assembly.
Declaration and continuance of laws: According to substitution in Article 270AA, the proclamation of emergency of the fourteenth day of October, 1999, the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) No 1, the Oath of Office (Judges) Order, 2000, Chief Executive Order No 12 of 2002, Chief Executive Order No 19 of 2002, the amendments made in the Constitution through LFO, 2002, (Chief Executive Order No 24), the LFO (Amendment) Order, 2002, Chief Executive’s Order No 29 of 2002) and the LFO (Second Amendment) Order, 2002 (Chief Executive Order No 32 of 2002), notwithstanding any judgment of any court, including the Supreme Court or a High Court, are hereby declared as having been made without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
Judges of the Supreme Court, High Courts and Federal Shariat Court who were continuing to hold the office of a judge or were appointed as such, and had taken oath under the Oath of Office (Judges) Order 2000, shall be deemed to continue to hold the office as judge or appointed as such as the case may be, under the Constitution and such continuance or appointment, shall have effect accordingly.
Appointment of judges: With insertion of Article 175A in the Constitution, for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court, there shall be a judicial commission. For appointment of judges of the Supreme Court, the commission, headed by the chief justice of Pakistan, shall also consist of two most senior judges of the apex court, a former chief justice or a former judge of the Supreme Court to be appointed by the chief justice in consultation with two member judges for a period of two years, federal minister for law and justice, Attorney General for Pakistan, and a senior advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to be nominated by the Pakistan Bar Council for a period of two years.
The judicial commission for the appointment of High Court judge, headed by the chief justice of the High Court, would also include two most senior judges of the High Court, provincial law minister, a senior advocate to be nominated by the provincial bar council.
For appointment of judges of the Federal Shariat Court, the judicial commission shall also include the chief justice of the Shariat Court and the most senior judge of that court as its members.
Dissolution of the National Assembly: The committee proposed that Article 58-2(b) should be repealed and substituted with “Dissolution of the National Assembly”.
The substitution clause says that the president shall dissolve the National Assembly if so advised by the prime minister, and the National Assembly shall, unless sooner dissolved, stand dissolved at the expiration of forty-eight hours after the prime minister has so advised.
Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause 2 of Article 48, the president may also dissolve the National Assembly in his discretion where, a vote of no-confidence having been passed against the prime minister, no other member of the National Assembly commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly in accordance with the provision of the Constitution, as ascertained in a session of the National Assembly summoned for the purpose.
Passing of the bills: Recommended substitution in Article 70 with “introduction of passing of bills”, adding that a bill with respect to any matter in the Federal Legislative List may originate in either house and shall, if it is passed by the house in which it originated, be transmitted to the other house and if the bill is passed without amendment by the other house also, it shall be presented to the president for assent.
Bills presented in the house but not passed within 90 days of laying in the House shall be considered in a joint sitting of parliament.
Islamabad High Court: The constitutional reform package also proposes establishment of an Islamabad High Court. The committee has proposed that the judges of the Islamabad High Court should be taken from the federal capital and four provinces.
(The News, Apr 3, 2010)
It also seeks to transform the Prime Minister’s House into the epicentre of power, devolution of power from the Centre to the federating units and safety valve for the protection of democracy by recommending that suspension and holding of the Constitution in abeyance should be declared an act of high treason under Article 6 of the Constitution.
In all, the parliamentary committee’s report contains 100 recommendations to restore the 1973 Constitution in its original form. As Mian Raza Rabbani concluded his presentation, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and members from both sides of the isle hugged him.
Soon after presenting the report in the National Assembly, Rabbani moved to the Senate to present the report in the Upper House of parliament after which the sessions of both the houses were prorogued.
Opposition Leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and Law Minister Dr Babar Awan were conspicuous by their absence on this historic occasion. Highlighting the main features of the report, Raza Rabbani said the committee has recommended that parliament should declare the 17th Amendment to the Constitution and the Legal Framework Order (LFO) given by a dictator as without any legal authority and should be repealed.
It has also been recommended that the NWFP should be renamed as ‘Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa’. It has also been recommended that Article 58-2(b) of the Constitution should also be repealed.
The committee has recommended that for good governance the size of the cabinet should be restricted to 11 per cent of the members of parliament and this should also hold good for the provinces.
It has also been recommended that four seats, one from each province, should be allocated in the Senate for the minorities to increase their strength. It has been recommended that education to each child up to the age of 16 years be made compulsory.
It has been proposed that the formation of the council of common interests should be revised with prime minister as its chairman. The council should meet at least once in 90 days besides abolition of the Concurrent List.
It is proposed in Article 46 of the Constitution that the prime minister shall keep the president informed on all matters of internal and foreign policy and on all legislative proposals the federal government intends to bring before the Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament).
The committee proposed that the president could use the power of dissolution of the National Assembly when a vote of no-confidence having been passed against the prime minister, no other member of the National Assembly commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, as ascertained in a session of the National Assembly for the purpose.
The committee proposed insertion of Article 10(A) which says: For the determination of his civil rights and obligations or in any criminal charge against him a person shall be entitled to a fair trial and due process.
In Article 27, it is proposed that under-representation of any class or area in the service of Pakistan may be redressed in such manner as may be determined by an act of Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament).
A bar was imposed on the attorney general for doing private practice. The recommendations also include that inexpensive and expeditious justice should be ensured to the people as also the right of access to information without any hurdle.
Election Commission: According to the proposed amendment in Article 203C of the Constitution, the prime minister shall, in consultation with the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, forward three names for appointment of the chief election commissioner to a parliamentary committee for hearing and confirmation of any one person.
The parliamentary committee, to be constituted by the speaker, shall comprise 50 per cent from the opposition parties, based on their strength in Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament) to be nominated by the respective parliamentary leaders.
The proposed amendment further states provided in case there is no consensus between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition, each shall forward separate lists to the parliamentary committee for consideration, which may confirm one name.
The total strength of the parliamentary committee shall not exceed 12 members out of which one-third shall be from the Senate. Provided that when the National Assembly is dissolved and a vacancy occurs in the office of the chief election commissioner, the parliamentary committee shall comprise the members of the Senate only.
Terms of prime minister: It has been proposed that there shall be no restriction on the number of terms for the offices of the prime minister and chief ministers. Appointment of services chiefs: According to an amendment proposed in Article 243 of the Constitution, the prime minister would advise the president on appointment of the chairman of the chiefs of staff committee and chiefs of three armed forces.
The Senate: According to an amendment proposed in Article 59 of the Constitution, the Senate shall consist of 104 instead of 100 with the addition of one minority member from each province. As per amendment proposed in Article 61, the working days of the Senate have been increased from 90 to 110.
Disqualification for membership of Majlis-e-Shoora: According to the amendment proposed in Article 63 of the Constitution, the restriction on a person who has been dismissed from the service of Pakistan, service of a corporation or office set up or controlled by the federal government or the provincial government on ground of misconduct has been lifted. According to this amendment, a person could be elected as MP, three or five years after dismissal from the service.
According to the amendment, a person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as, and from being, a member of parliament if he has been dismissed from the service of Pakistan or service of a corporation or office set up or, controlled, by the federal government, the provincial government or a local government on ground of misconduct, unless a period of five years since his removal or dismissal; or unless a period of three years has elapsed since his removal or compulsory retirement.
The restriction on a person being elected as member of parliament, who has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for propagating any opinion, or acting in any manner, prejudicial to the ideology of Pakistan, or the sovereignty, integrity or security of Pakistan, or integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan, or which defames or bring into ridicule the judiciary or the armed forces of Pakistan, unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release. (Interior Minister Rehman Malik would benefit from amendment in Article 63 as he was dismissed from government service in 1998-1999).
The proposed amendment would also benefit PML-N leaders who were disqualified as being members of parliament for being involved in attack on the Supreme Court building. They include Mian Munir, Chaudhry Tanvir, Sardar Naseem, Tariq Aziz, Chaudhry Akhtar Rasool and others.
Public service commission: Chairman of the Federal Public Service Commission would be appointed by the president on the advice of the prime minister. Similarly, chairmen of the provincial public service commissions would be appointed by the governors on the advice of chief ministers.
Proclamation of emergency: Under proposed amendment in Article 232 of the Constitution, the proclamation of emergency in the province due to internal disturbances would require a resolution from the provincial assembly.
Provided further that if the president acts on his own the proclamation of emergency shall be placed before both houses of parliament for approval by each house within 10 days.
Caretaker prime minister: On dissolution of the assembly or completion of its term, or in case it is dissolved under Article 58 or Article 112, a caretaker shall be selected by the president in consultation with the prime minister and the leader of the opposition in the outgoing National Assembly. Similarly, a caretaker chief minister will be appointed in consultation with the chief minister and the leader of the opposition in the outgoing provincial assembly.
Declaration and continuance of laws: According to substitution in Article 270AA, the proclamation of emergency of the fourteenth day of October, 1999, the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) No 1, the Oath of Office (Judges) Order, 2000, Chief Executive Order No 12 of 2002, Chief Executive Order No 19 of 2002, the amendments made in the Constitution through LFO, 2002, (Chief Executive Order No 24), the LFO (Amendment) Order, 2002, Chief Executive’s Order No 29 of 2002) and the LFO (Second Amendment) Order, 2002 (Chief Executive Order No 32 of 2002), notwithstanding any judgment of any court, including the Supreme Court or a High Court, are hereby declared as having been made without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
Judges of the Supreme Court, High Courts and Federal Shariat Court who were continuing to hold the office of a judge or were appointed as such, and had taken oath under the Oath of Office (Judges) Order 2000, shall be deemed to continue to hold the office as judge or appointed as such as the case may be, under the Constitution and such continuance or appointment, shall have effect accordingly.
Appointment of judges: With insertion of Article 175A in the Constitution, for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court, there shall be a judicial commission. For appointment of judges of the Supreme Court, the commission, headed by the chief justice of Pakistan, shall also consist of two most senior judges of the apex court, a former chief justice or a former judge of the Supreme Court to be appointed by the chief justice in consultation with two member judges for a period of two years, federal minister for law and justice, Attorney General for Pakistan, and a senior advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to be nominated by the Pakistan Bar Council for a period of two years.
The judicial commission for the appointment of High Court judge, headed by the chief justice of the High Court, would also include two most senior judges of the High Court, provincial law minister, a senior advocate to be nominated by the provincial bar council.
For appointment of judges of the Federal Shariat Court, the judicial commission shall also include the chief justice of the Shariat Court and the most senior judge of that court as its members.
Dissolution of the National Assembly: The committee proposed that Article 58-2(b) should be repealed and substituted with “Dissolution of the National Assembly”.
The substitution clause says that the president shall dissolve the National Assembly if so advised by the prime minister, and the National Assembly shall, unless sooner dissolved, stand dissolved at the expiration of forty-eight hours after the prime minister has so advised.
Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause 2 of Article 48, the president may also dissolve the National Assembly in his discretion where, a vote of no-confidence having been passed against the prime minister, no other member of the National Assembly commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly in accordance with the provision of the Constitution, as ascertained in a session of the National Assembly summoned for the purpose.
Passing of the bills: Recommended substitution in Article 70 with “introduction of passing of bills”, adding that a bill with respect to any matter in the Federal Legislative List may originate in either house and shall, if it is passed by the house in which it originated, be transmitted to the other house and if the bill is passed without amendment by the other house also, it shall be presented to the president for assent.
Bills presented in the house but not passed within 90 days of laying in the House shall be considered in a joint sitting of parliament.
Islamabad High Court: The constitutional reform package also proposes establishment of an Islamabad High Court. The committee has proposed that the judges of the Islamabad High Court should be taken from the federal capital and four provinces.
(The News, Apr 3, 2010)
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Candidate of Muslim League (N) defeated Sheikh Rashid in NA 55
RAWALPINDI: PML-N candidate Malik Shakeel Awan defeated the Rawalpindi heavyweight and chief of the Awami Muslim League Sheikh Rashid by a big margin in the NA-55 by-polls held here on Wednesday.
The margin of victory was beyond expectations as political pundits, experts, analysts and the people had expected a close finish. According to unofficial results, of the total 250 polling stations, Shakeel Awan secured 77,309 votes while his closest rival Sheikh Rashid got 48,222 from 235 constituencies. Dr Mohammad Kamal remained in the third place by securing 7,524 votes followed by PTI candidate Ejaz Khan Jazi, who could muster only 4,000 votes. Sheikh Rashid failed to win despite being backed by the PML-Q and the PPP tacitly.
The winner, Shakeel Awan, thanked the people for reposing confidence in him and making him victorious against a seasoned politician like Sheikh Rashid. During his election campaign, the AML chief had been telling people to vote for the real representative of NA-55.
“The people have now chosen me as the real representativeof NA-55. I would make it a model constituency,” he said. Sheikh Rashid has won from this constituency six times but was defeated in the February 2008 elections. Had he not been backed by the PPP and the Q-League this time, he would have polled still fewer votes. Shakeel Awan says he would have defeated Sheikh Rashid by a margin of 100,000 votes had the PPP and the PML-Q not supported his rival.
Sensing defeat, Sheikh Rashid alleged rigging even in the early phase of polling and refused to meet media persons, who went to the Lal Haveli to get his comments. Later, a dejected and disappointed Sheikh Rashid addressed newsmen in the Lal Haveli and accepted defeat. “I have no personal difference with anyone, only political.” He again alleged poll rigging. He vowed to continue his politics as the AML chief and termed the media, both print and electronic, his friend.
Immediately after the announcement of unofficial results, leaders, workers and activists of the PML-N came out on the streets and danced in jubilation to express joy over the victory of Shakeel Awan. Later, Nawaz Sharif visited the main election office of Shakeel Awan in Rawalpindi and congratulated him on his success.
Addressing hundreds of people gathered outside the office, Nawaz Sharif said Shakeel Awan has defeated one of the thieves of Ali Baba. The people of Rawalpindi have rejected the politics of hypocrisy, he said. Nawaz claimed if the PPP and the PML-Q had not supported Sheikh Rashid, the margin of Shakeel’s victory would have been much bigger. According to the Election Commission, the voters’ turnout was more than 50 per cent.
The margin of victory was beyond expectations as political pundits, experts, analysts and the people had expected a close finish. According to unofficial results, of the total 250 polling stations, Shakeel Awan secured 77,309 votes while his closest rival Sheikh Rashid got 48,222 from 235 constituencies. Dr Mohammad Kamal remained in the third place by securing 7,524 votes followed by PTI candidate Ejaz Khan Jazi, who could muster only 4,000 votes. Sheikh Rashid failed to win despite being backed by the PML-Q and the PPP tacitly.
The winner, Shakeel Awan, thanked the people for reposing confidence in him and making him victorious against a seasoned politician like Sheikh Rashid. During his election campaign, the AML chief had been telling people to vote for the real representative of NA-55.
“The people have now chosen me as the real representativeof NA-55. I would make it a model constituency,” he said. Sheikh Rashid has won from this constituency six times but was defeated in the February 2008 elections. Had he not been backed by the PPP and the Q-League this time, he would have polled still fewer votes. Shakeel Awan says he would have defeated Sheikh Rashid by a margin of 100,000 votes had the PPP and the PML-Q not supported his rival.
Sensing defeat, Sheikh Rashid alleged rigging even in the early phase of polling and refused to meet media persons, who went to the Lal Haveli to get his comments. Later, a dejected and disappointed Sheikh Rashid addressed newsmen in the Lal Haveli and accepted defeat. “I have no personal difference with anyone, only political.” He again alleged poll rigging. He vowed to continue his politics as the AML chief and termed the media, both print and electronic, his friend.
Immediately after the announcement of unofficial results, leaders, workers and activists of the PML-N came out on the streets and danced in jubilation to express joy over the victory of Shakeel Awan. Later, Nawaz Sharif visited the main election office of Shakeel Awan in Rawalpindi and congratulated him on his success.
Addressing hundreds of people gathered outside the office, Nawaz Sharif said Shakeel Awan has defeated one of the thieves of Ali Baba. The people of Rawalpindi have rejected the politics of hypocrisy, he said. Nawaz claimed if the PPP and the PML-Q had not supported Sheikh Rashid, the margin of Shakeel’s victory would have been much bigger. According to the Election Commission, the voters’ turnout was more than 50 per cent.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Government Surrenders to Chief Justice
ISLAMABAD: One bold step of Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani on Tuesday night followed by his rare meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on Wednesday eased the prevailing tension in the country altogether and averted a possible clash between the executive and the judiciary.
Just minutes after his meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry at the Prime Minister House, Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani announced the good news that he had promised with the nation on Tuesday night, saying a notification in suppression of the earlier notifications would be issued tonight (Wednesday) for the appointment of judges. Consequently, Justice Saqib Nisar and Justice Asif Saeed Khosa of the Lahore High Court would be elevated as judges of the Supreme Court while retired judge Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday would be appointed as an ad hoc judge of the apex court while Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif would continue as Chief Justice Lahore High Court.
“Today’s decision was taken in the best interest of Pakistan, the nation and political stability and now the crisis is over,” said Gilani after a marathon meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry that lasted over three hours.
When Prime Minister Gilani and Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry came out, media persons asked questions from the chief justice asking whether he would also visit the Presidency but the chief justice parried the questions and sat in his car smilingly.
After the press talk at the Prime Minister House, the prime minister also took the National Assembly into confidence about his meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Earlier, talking to the newsmen at the Prime Minister House, Gilani said the recommendations of the chief justices of Lahore and Sindh high courts would also be duly implemented after consultation with the governors of the provinces concerned tonight.
Answering a question, the prime minister said the meeting with the chief justice was part of the consultative process and it is a proper procedure under the Constitution. He said matters settled during the meeting on Wednesday would be sent to the president with advice for implementation.
Answering a question, the prime minister said stability and strengthening of democracy is in the interest of the country and all players should play their due role in this process. He made it clear that there was no deadlock on any issue with the judiciary and all issues had been resolved amicably through the consultation process in the great national interest.
He said it is democracy and the consultative process that has resulted in the resolution of all issues. “We have been successful to solve all problems today earlier than tomorrow for which the nation was waiting anxiously,” he added.
When asked whether his decision enjoyed the blessings of the Presidency, the prime minister said he and the president belonged to the same party and this decision had his blessings.
Answering another question, he said man makes mistakes and every wrong has a remedy that is reflected in Wednesday’s consultative process. “We reached a positive conclusion under the ambit of the Constitution,” he said.
Regarding the endorsement of the restoration of the judges from parliament, Gilani said that it was an opinion of some constitutional experts but his own intention was only to restore the judges according to the Constitution and aspirations of the people. “There is no need for the endorsement now,” he said.
The prime minister once again reiterated his commitment that the government will fully implement the verdict of the Supreme Court on all issues. He negated the doctrine of necessity and said there was no need of such doctrine while democracy was in process and both the state institutions, including the judiciary and the executive have to work collectively for the progress and development of the country.
Later addressing the National Assembly, Prime Minister Gilani said resolution of the issue of appointment of judges in the superior courts has averted crisis-like situation and apprehensions about the clash of institutions.
Taking the National Assembly into confidence over the consultative process he held earlier with the chief justice on the issue, he said it was participatory, meaningful and consensus-oriented as required under the Constitution.
The prime minister said there was a consensus in the House that they should take the judiciary along and the leader of the opposition was also of the view that there should be no clash with the judiciary.
Gilani said he too had announced that the government had the highest regard for the judiciary and would accept its verdicts. Referring to the points raised by Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, the prime minister said during his meeting with Nawaz Sharif and the leader of the opposition he had hinted at reissuing the notification the next day regarding the appointment of judges. He said the objective was to take the opposition into confidence and not to mislead it.
Similarly, he said he telephoned Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday night telling him that the issue would be resolved very soon and within two hours he met the chief justice at a dinner in Islamabad.
The prime minister dispelled the impression that the government wanted to push through the points in the Charter of Democracy regarding procedure for appointment of judges with a view to appointing judges of its choice after constitutional amendments.
He said he clarified that the procedure for appointment of judges under the CoD would not be applicable to the present judiciary. Meanwhile, a press release issued after the meeting between Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry stated that on the invitation of Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, met him at the PM House here on Wednesday as part of the consultative process for appointments in the superior judiciary which was participatory, and consensus-oriented.
As a consequence of the meeting, it was decided that in supersession of earlier notifications, Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif shall remain the chief justice of the Lahore High Court and three judges are being appointed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan: Justice Saqib Nisar, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday (ad hoc). The process for the elevation of judges to the Lahore High Court and the Sindh High Court has been finalised and a notification in this regard is being issued today after observing procedural requirements.
The meeting took stock of institutional framework as enshrined in the Constitution and it was reiterated that the rule of law forms the basis for functioning of all the state organs to ensure greater welfare of the people.
It was agreed that in order to achieve this goal the process of consultation among the pillars of the state should be constructive and meaningful. It was felt that the judiciary would be further strengthened to provide cheap and immediate justice to the public at their doorsteps.
The prime minister said the government holds the judiciary in high esteem and shall implement all its decisions in letter and spirit. The chief justice of Pakistan said the judiciary would continue to play its role for upholding the rule of law and Constitution to strengthen the democratic system for the greater glory of Pakistan.
APP adds: When asked whether the meeting would have any impact on the decision of the Supreme Court on the NRO, the prime minister said the court decision would be fully implemented.About the court’s verdict on the appointment of chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Gilani said: “Leave the decision about the NAB to the government.”
(The News: 18 Feb 2010)
Just minutes after his meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry at the Prime Minister House, Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani announced the good news that he had promised with the nation on Tuesday night, saying a notification in suppression of the earlier notifications would be issued tonight (Wednesday) for the appointment of judges. Consequently, Justice Saqib Nisar and Justice Asif Saeed Khosa of the Lahore High Court would be elevated as judges of the Supreme Court while retired judge Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday would be appointed as an ad hoc judge of the apex court while Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif would continue as Chief Justice Lahore High Court.
“Today’s decision was taken in the best interest of Pakistan, the nation and political stability and now the crisis is over,” said Gilani after a marathon meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry that lasted over three hours.
When Prime Minister Gilani and Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry came out, media persons asked questions from the chief justice asking whether he would also visit the Presidency but the chief justice parried the questions and sat in his car smilingly.
After the press talk at the Prime Minister House, the prime minister also took the National Assembly into confidence about his meeting with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Earlier, talking to the newsmen at the Prime Minister House, Gilani said the recommendations of the chief justices of Lahore and Sindh high courts would also be duly implemented after consultation with the governors of the provinces concerned tonight.
Answering a question, the prime minister said the meeting with the chief justice was part of the consultative process and it is a proper procedure under the Constitution. He said matters settled during the meeting on Wednesday would be sent to the president with advice for implementation.
Answering a question, the prime minister said stability and strengthening of democracy is in the interest of the country and all players should play their due role in this process. He made it clear that there was no deadlock on any issue with the judiciary and all issues had been resolved amicably through the consultation process in the great national interest.
He said it is democracy and the consultative process that has resulted in the resolution of all issues. “We have been successful to solve all problems today earlier than tomorrow for which the nation was waiting anxiously,” he added.
When asked whether his decision enjoyed the blessings of the Presidency, the prime minister said he and the president belonged to the same party and this decision had his blessings.
Answering another question, he said man makes mistakes and every wrong has a remedy that is reflected in Wednesday’s consultative process. “We reached a positive conclusion under the ambit of the Constitution,” he said.
Regarding the endorsement of the restoration of the judges from parliament, Gilani said that it was an opinion of some constitutional experts but his own intention was only to restore the judges according to the Constitution and aspirations of the people. “There is no need for the endorsement now,” he said.
The prime minister once again reiterated his commitment that the government will fully implement the verdict of the Supreme Court on all issues. He negated the doctrine of necessity and said there was no need of such doctrine while democracy was in process and both the state institutions, including the judiciary and the executive have to work collectively for the progress and development of the country.
Later addressing the National Assembly, Prime Minister Gilani said resolution of the issue of appointment of judges in the superior courts has averted crisis-like situation and apprehensions about the clash of institutions.
Taking the National Assembly into confidence over the consultative process he held earlier with the chief justice on the issue, he said it was participatory, meaningful and consensus-oriented as required under the Constitution.
The prime minister said there was a consensus in the House that they should take the judiciary along and the leader of the opposition was also of the view that there should be no clash with the judiciary.
Gilani said he too had announced that the government had the highest regard for the judiciary and would accept its verdicts. Referring to the points raised by Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, the prime minister said during his meeting with Nawaz Sharif and the leader of the opposition he had hinted at reissuing the notification the next day regarding the appointment of judges. He said the objective was to take the opposition into confidence and not to mislead it.
Similarly, he said he telephoned Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday night telling him that the issue would be resolved very soon and within two hours he met the chief justice at a dinner in Islamabad.
The prime minister dispelled the impression that the government wanted to push through the points in the Charter of Democracy regarding procedure for appointment of judges with a view to appointing judges of its choice after constitutional amendments.
He said he clarified that the procedure for appointment of judges under the CoD would not be applicable to the present judiciary. Meanwhile, a press release issued after the meeting between Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry stated that on the invitation of Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, met him at the PM House here on Wednesday as part of the consultative process for appointments in the superior judiciary which was participatory, and consensus-oriented.
As a consequence of the meeting, it was decided that in supersession of earlier notifications, Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif shall remain the chief justice of the Lahore High Court and three judges are being appointed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan: Justice Saqib Nisar, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday (ad hoc). The process for the elevation of judges to the Lahore High Court and the Sindh High Court has been finalised and a notification in this regard is being issued today after observing procedural requirements.
The meeting took stock of institutional framework as enshrined in the Constitution and it was reiterated that the rule of law forms the basis for functioning of all the state organs to ensure greater welfare of the people.
It was agreed that in order to achieve this goal the process of consultation among the pillars of the state should be constructive and meaningful. It was felt that the judiciary would be further strengthened to provide cheap and immediate justice to the public at their doorsteps.
The prime minister said the government holds the judiciary in high esteem and shall implement all its decisions in letter and spirit. The chief justice of Pakistan said the judiciary would continue to play its role for upholding the rule of law and Constitution to strengthen the democratic system for the greater glory of Pakistan.
APP adds: When asked whether the meeting would have any impact on the decision of the Supreme Court on the NRO, the prime minister said the court decision would be fully implemented.About the court’s verdict on the appointment of chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Gilani said: “Leave the decision about the NAB to the government.”
(The News: 18 Feb 2010)
Monday, February 15, 2010
President overrides CJ’s recommendation on judges’ elevation; SC suspends Zardari’s orders
ISLAMABAD: Saturday evening witnessed the zenith of the weeks long tense build-up between the Presidency and the Supreme Court over the issue of elevation of Lahore High Court chief justice to the Supreme Court and the appointment of his successor. The president first issued orders to this effect only to receive a stinging rebuke within hours from the Supreme Court which said ‘no thank you Mr president’ and suspended his freshly issued notifications.
The Supreme Court suspended the presidential order regarding appointment of Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court and Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice Lahore High Court declaring it a clear violation of Article 177 of the Constitution.
President Asif Ali Zardari through two different notifications had appointed Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court and senior Judge LHC Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, however, took suo moto notice of the government notification immediately after its issuance and formed a three-member bench of the apex court for hearing the case.
The three-member bench headed by Justice Mian Shakiruallh Jan and comprising Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Justice Jawad S Khawaja while hearing the matter at 9pm suspended the two notifications of the government declaring it clear violation of Article 177 of the Constitution.
“Notification of Justice Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court has been suspended and he will continue as Chief Justice of Lahore High Court,” the court ruled after sending notice to Attorney General for Pakistan Anwar Mansoor Khan, secretary Law as well as registrar Lahore High Court for Feb 18.
The court also suspended the 2nd notification of the government regarding the appointment of Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court and ruled that Justice Saqib will continue as senior judge of the Lahore High Court.
The court also restrained the governor Punjab, who was scheduled today (Sunday) to administer oath to Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice Lahore High Court.
“So no step will be taken by any functionaries to administer oath to Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court,” the court ruled.
Additional Registrar of the Supreme Court Sajid Mahmood Qazi placed on record of the court that there was no such recommendation of the chief justice of Pakistan for the appointment of Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court.
The court also issued notice to additional secretary Law and other officials under whose domain the notifications of appointment of judges were issued and directed them to appear before the court on Feb 18, wherein hearing into the case of delay in appointment of judges will be held.
A five-member larger bench of the apex court has already been constituted to hear the petitions filed against the government for delay in the appointment of judges in the superior courts.
The court had issued notices to Federal Government, attorney general for Pakistan and four provincial advocate generals in the case.
Earlier the court summoned Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan. However he was not available as he had flown to Karachi. The court through additional registrar of the Supreme Court intimated him on phone. However, he could not appear before the court and informed the court that the last available flight from Karachi took off at 7pm and he was unable to appear before the court.
Soon after Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry took suo moto notice of the presidential order, a large number of people thronged the Supreme Court building.
After the hearing of the suo moto case, people gathered outside the Supreme Court and chanted slogans in favour of the chief justice and supremacy of the constitution.
The incumbent PPP government on Saturday launched an open war with the county’s judiciary after setting aside the recommendations of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to President Asif Ali Zardari for appointment of Justice Saqib Nisar, a judge of Lahore High Court, as judge of the Supreme Court.
The president in violation of Article 177 of the Constitution, set aside the recommendation of the chief justice and appointed Justice Khwaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice LHC as judge of the Supreme Court and appointed Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court.
According to Article 260 of the Constitution, the president is bound to accept the recommendation of the chief justice for appointment of judges in the superior judiciary.
Legal circles believe that the government has waged an open war against the judiciary, which is not a good omen in the country’s prevailing situation.
“It’s a clear cut violation of the constitution and law as the president is bound to accept the recommendations of chief justice of Pakistan in the appointment of judges in the superior courts,” said Muhammad Ikram Chaudhry, senior advocate of the Supreme Court.
He said that by passing the recommendation of the chief justice and appointing Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court is clear cut violation of the constitution which is not a good sign and the president has waged an open war with the judiciary as well as creating rift between the institutions of the country.
It is for the first time in the history of Pakistan that a senior judge has been appointed as acting chief justice.
Earlier, there has been some tension between the government and the judiciary over the issue of elevating Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, Chief Justice Lahore High Court Justice Khwaja Sharif and Justice Saqib Nisar, the senior most LHC judge, Saturday refused to accept the decision of the government.
Talking to Geo TV, Justice Saqib Nisar said he was invited to take oath as acting CJ of LHC on Sunday by Governor Salman Taseer, but he refused the invitation by saying: “The orders of Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry are binding for me and I will not take any step against the recommendation or instruction of the CJP.”
TEXT OF SC SHORT ORDER
“IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) PRESENT: Mr Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan Mr Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed Mr Justice Jawwad S Khawaja Constitution Petitions No 2, 3 & 4 of 2010
Nadeem Ahmed Advocate (in Const P.2/2010)
Khadim Nadeem Malik ....(in Const P.3/2010) Watan Party,etc. (in Const.P.4/2010) ....Petitioner (s) Versus Federation of Pakistan etc.
Respondents in all petitions for the petitioner(s): Nemo for the respondents: Nemo on court’s call: Qazi Sajid Mehmood, Additional Registrar Date of hearing: 13.02.2010
“ORDER: Today two notifications, one relating to the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court as a Judge of the Supreme Court and the other with regard to the appointment of Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Senior Puisne Judge of the Lahore High Court as Acting Chief Justice of that Court have been issued by the Government of Pakistan, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Division under the signatures of Malik Hakam Khan, Draftsman/Additional Secretary. The said notifications read as under: - “No.F.2(1)/2010-A.II.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 177 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the President is pleased to appoint Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan with immediate effect.
No.F.1(2)/2009-A.II.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 196 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the President is pleased to appoint Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Judge, Lahore High Court as Acting Chief Justice of the said High Court with effect from the date of the notification of the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.”
2. The Additional Registrar, who appeared on Court’s call, informed the Court that a news was telecast in the electronic media regarding the aforesaid notifications and it was also in the news that Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar would be administered oath by tomorrow morning (Sunday), which necessitated the hearing of this case as an urgent one and this Bench was constituted. Since it was an important matter, the Additional Registrar was directed to issue notice to the learned Attorney General including through telephone and we retired for a while until we were informed about the service of the notice upon the learned Attorney General. After some time we were informed by the Court Associate that the Additional Registrar, after informing the learned Attorney General through telephone about the hearing of the case had come to the Court, so we re-assembled.
3. The Additional Registrar, in his report stated that he informed the learned Attorney General for Pakistan through telephone who told him (Additional Registrar) that he was in Karachi at the moment and that the last scheduled flight from Karachi to Islamabad had already departed at 7:00 p.m., he expressed his inability to appear before the Court. Since the matter was of urgent nature, as stated earlier, steps would be required to be taken by the Governor of the Punjab to administer oath to Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court by tomorrow morning, hearing could not be postponed without passing an appropriate interim order.
4. Article 177 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan provides that a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of Pakistan. The Additional Registrar stated that according to the record of this Court no consultation had taken place by the President with the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court. In the light of the statement of Additional Registrar and also the note submitted by him and placed on the file of Constitution Petitions No. 2, 3 and 4 of 2010 relating to the same/almost the same matter, already pending before this Court in which notices had been issued and a larger Bench constituted for 18-2-2010, the notification of the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif as a Judge of the Supreme Court, prima facie, appears to have been issued in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly, Article 177, hence the same is suspended subject to notice to the Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Division, the Attorney General for Pakistan and the learned Advocate General Punjab. Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif shall continue to perform his duties as Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court until further orders of this Court. No steps to administer oath to him will be taken.
5. In view of the suspension of notification No.F.2(1)2010-A.II. dated 13.2.2010 regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif as a Judge of the Supreme Court, the office of Chief Justice of Lahore High Court will not fall vacant, therefore, the second notification No.F.1(2)/2009-A.II of even date regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court cannot be acted upon. Therefore, the same too is suspended. In consequence, Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar will also continue to perform his duties as a Judge of the Lahore High Court until further orders. Resultantly, no steps including administering of oath to Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court shall be taken by the concerned functionaries.
6. The Draftsman/Additional Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, under whose signatures the aforesaid notifications have been issued, is directed to appear in Court on 18.02.2010, the date already fixed in the titled cases. The Registrar of the Lahore High Court shall also appear on the said date.”
(The News: 14 Feb 2010)
The Supreme Court suspended the presidential order regarding appointment of Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court and Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice Lahore High Court declaring it a clear violation of Article 177 of the Constitution.
President Asif Ali Zardari through two different notifications had appointed Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court and senior Judge LHC Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, however, took suo moto notice of the government notification immediately after its issuance and formed a three-member bench of the apex court for hearing the case.
The three-member bench headed by Justice Mian Shakiruallh Jan and comprising Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Justice Jawad S Khawaja while hearing the matter at 9pm suspended the two notifications of the government declaring it clear violation of Article 177 of the Constitution.
“Notification of Justice Khwaja Sharif as Judge Supreme Court has been suspended and he will continue as Chief Justice of Lahore High Court,” the court ruled after sending notice to Attorney General for Pakistan Anwar Mansoor Khan, secretary Law as well as registrar Lahore High Court for Feb 18.
The court also suspended the 2nd notification of the government regarding the appointment of Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court and ruled that Justice Saqib will continue as senior judge of the Lahore High Court.
The court also restrained the governor Punjab, who was scheduled today (Sunday) to administer oath to Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice Lahore High Court.
“So no step will be taken by any functionaries to administer oath to Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court,” the court ruled.
Additional Registrar of the Supreme Court Sajid Mahmood Qazi placed on record of the court that there was no such recommendation of the chief justice of Pakistan for the appointment of Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court.
The court also issued notice to additional secretary Law and other officials under whose domain the notifications of appointment of judges were issued and directed them to appear before the court on Feb 18, wherein hearing into the case of delay in appointment of judges will be held.
A five-member larger bench of the apex court has already been constituted to hear the petitions filed against the government for delay in the appointment of judges in the superior courts.
The court had issued notices to Federal Government, attorney general for Pakistan and four provincial advocate generals in the case.
Earlier the court summoned Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan. However he was not available as he had flown to Karachi. The court through additional registrar of the Supreme Court intimated him on phone. However, he could not appear before the court and informed the court that the last available flight from Karachi took off at 7pm and he was unable to appear before the court.
Soon after Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry took suo moto notice of the presidential order, a large number of people thronged the Supreme Court building.
After the hearing of the suo moto case, people gathered outside the Supreme Court and chanted slogans in favour of the chief justice and supremacy of the constitution.
The incumbent PPP government on Saturday launched an open war with the county’s judiciary after setting aside the recommendations of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to President Asif Ali Zardari for appointment of Justice Saqib Nisar, a judge of Lahore High Court, as judge of the Supreme Court.
The president in violation of Article 177 of the Constitution, set aside the recommendation of the chief justice and appointed Justice Khwaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice LHC as judge of the Supreme Court and appointed Justice Saqib Nisar as acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court.
According to Article 260 of the Constitution, the president is bound to accept the recommendation of the chief justice for appointment of judges in the superior judiciary.
Legal circles believe that the government has waged an open war against the judiciary, which is not a good omen in the country’s prevailing situation.
“It’s a clear cut violation of the constitution and law as the president is bound to accept the recommendations of chief justice of Pakistan in the appointment of judges in the superior courts,” said Muhammad Ikram Chaudhry, senior advocate of the Supreme Court.
He said that by passing the recommendation of the chief justice and appointing Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court is clear cut violation of the constitution which is not a good sign and the president has waged an open war with the judiciary as well as creating rift between the institutions of the country.
It is for the first time in the history of Pakistan that a senior judge has been appointed as acting chief justice.
Earlier, there has been some tension between the government and the judiciary over the issue of elevating Justice Khwaja Sharif as judge of the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, Chief Justice Lahore High Court Justice Khwaja Sharif and Justice Saqib Nisar, the senior most LHC judge, Saturday refused to accept the decision of the government.
Talking to Geo TV, Justice Saqib Nisar said he was invited to take oath as acting CJ of LHC on Sunday by Governor Salman Taseer, but he refused the invitation by saying: “The orders of Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry are binding for me and I will not take any step against the recommendation or instruction of the CJP.”
TEXT OF SC SHORT ORDER
“IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) PRESENT: Mr Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan Mr Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed Mr Justice Jawwad S Khawaja Constitution Petitions No 2, 3 & 4 of 2010
Nadeem Ahmed Advocate (in Const P.2/2010)
Khadim Nadeem Malik ....(in Const P.3/2010) Watan Party,etc. (in Const.P.4/2010) ....Petitioner (s) Versus Federation of Pakistan etc.
Respondents in all petitions for the petitioner(s): Nemo for the respondents: Nemo on court’s call: Qazi Sajid Mehmood, Additional Registrar Date of hearing: 13.02.2010
“ORDER: Today two notifications, one relating to the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court as a Judge of the Supreme Court and the other with regard to the appointment of Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Senior Puisne Judge of the Lahore High Court as Acting Chief Justice of that Court have been issued by the Government of Pakistan, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Division under the signatures of Malik Hakam Khan, Draftsman/Additional Secretary. The said notifications read as under: - “No.F.2(1)/2010-A.II.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 177 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the President is pleased to appoint Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan with immediate effect.
No.F.1(2)/2009-A.II.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 196 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the President is pleased to appoint Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Judge, Lahore High Court as Acting Chief Justice of the said High Court with effect from the date of the notification of the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.”
2. The Additional Registrar, who appeared on Court’s call, informed the Court that a news was telecast in the electronic media regarding the aforesaid notifications and it was also in the news that Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar would be administered oath by tomorrow morning (Sunday), which necessitated the hearing of this case as an urgent one and this Bench was constituted. Since it was an important matter, the Additional Registrar was directed to issue notice to the learned Attorney General including through telephone and we retired for a while until we were informed about the service of the notice upon the learned Attorney General. After some time we were informed by the Court Associate that the Additional Registrar, after informing the learned Attorney General through telephone about the hearing of the case had come to the Court, so we re-assembled.
3. The Additional Registrar, in his report stated that he informed the learned Attorney General for Pakistan through telephone who told him (Additional Registrar) that he was in Karachi at the moment and that the last scheduled flight from Karachi to Islamabad had already departed at 7:00 p.m., he expressed his inability to appear before the Court. Since the matter was of urgent nature, as stated earlier, steps would be required to be taken by the Governor of the Punjab to administer oath to Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court by tomorrow morning, hearing could not be postponed without passing an appropriate interim order.
4. Article 177 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan provides that a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of Pakistan. The Additional Registrar stated that according to the record of this Court no consultation had taken place by the President with the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court as Judge of the Supreme Court. In the light of the statement of Additional Registrar and also the note submitted by him and placed on the file of Constitution Petitions No. 2, 3 and 4 of 2010 relating to the same/almost the same matter, already pending before this Court in which notices had been issued and a larger Bench constituted for 18-2-2010, the notification of the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif as a Judge of the Supreme Court, prima facie, appears to have been issued in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly, Article 177, hence the same is suspended subject to notice to the Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Division, the Attorney General for Pakistan and the learned Advocate General Punjab. Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif shall continue to perform his duties as Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court until further orders of this Court. No steps to administer oath to him will be taken.
5. In view of the suspension of notification No.F.2(1)2010-A.II. dated 13.2.2010 regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif as a Judge of the Supreme Court, the office of Chief Justice of Lahore High Court will not fall vacant, therefore, the second notification No.F.1(2)/2009-A.II of even date regarding the appointment of Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court cannot be acted upon. Therefore, the same too is suspended. In consequence, Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar will also continue to perform his duties as a Judge of the Lahore High Court until further orders. Resultantly, no steps including administering of oath to Mr Justice Mian Saqib Nisar as Acting Chief Justice of Lahore High Court shall be taken by the concerned functionaries.
6. The Draftsman/Additional Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, under whose signatures the aforesaid notifications have been issued, is directed to appear in Court on 18.02.2010, the date already fixed in the titled cases. The Registrar of the Lahore High Court shall also appear on the said date.”
(The News: 14 Feb 2010)
Monday, January 18, 2010
Supreme Court releases detailed judgment on NRO
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday night issued the detailed judgment in the NRO case, throwing the ball in the court of the PPP government to implement some of the decisions which could practically destroy or fatally damage the top leadership of the party.
A hushed lull and shock has gripped the PPP leaders and cadres as the prime minister and his cabinet are now caught between the rock and the hard place, since both the options, to accept and implement the judgment or to reject it, would ultimately land the government in a major political crisis.
Prime Minister Gilani had only 24 hours ago promised to the nation in the National Assembly that he would abide by the SC verdict and did not want any clash of institutions. But the NRO judgment will force him to prove whether he is loyal to the party or to the country’s institutions and long-term interests.
The NRO, the most controversial ordinance promulgated by former military dictator Pervez Musharraf, was aimed at giving legal cover to the corruption of politicians and the privileged class. But the SC has virtually cancelled all the benefits and reopened buried cases which could disqualify a big portion of the PPP leadership. The detailed judgment is a reinforcement of the apex court earlier landmark verdict in the NRO case on December 16, 2009, declaring it as never to have existed and against the Constitution, besides holding that the criminal cases could not be withdrawn in the name of reconciliation.
The 287-page detailed ruling was written by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and signed by all the judges of the apex court, including Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, who got retired on January 12.
The detailed judgment, while citing the example of Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos, ruled that the Philippine government had also brought the looted money by the dictator back to the country, which could be taken as a reference.
The NRO was challenged by Dr Mubashar Hassan, former bureaucrat Roedad Khan, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Mian Shahbaz Sharif and others in the apex court in 2007. A 17-member larger bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, in its landmark and the expected judgment on December 16, 2009, had declared the NRO an instrument void ab initio, being ultra vires to various constitutional provisions, including articles 4, 8, 25, 62(f), 63(i)(p), 89, 175 and 227 of the Constitution.
Other members of the bench included Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassadduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice S Khawaja, Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, Justice Rahmat Husain Jafferi, Justice Tariq Parvez and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
Three judges of the apex court, including Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed and Justice Jawwad S Khwaja, have also added supporting notes in the detailed judgment.
Earlier, in it short order on December 16, 2009, the court had ruled that ìall steps taken, actions suffered, and all orders passed by whatever authority, any orders passed by the courts of law including the orders of discharge and acquittals recorded in favour of the accused persons, are also declared never to have existed in the eyes of law and resultantly of no legal effect”.
The court had further ruled that all cases in which the accused persons were either discharged or acquitted under “Section 2 of the NRO or where proceedings pending against the holders of public office had got terminated in view of Section 7 thereof, a list of which cases has been furnished to this court and any other such cases/proceedings which may not have been brought to the notice of this court, shall stand revived and relegated to the status of pre-5th of October, 2007 position”.
The detailed judgment noted that the president has an authority under Article 89 of the Constitution to promulgate an ordinance, but he cannot issue temporary legislation, which parliament is not empowered to do.
“A thorough perusal of the federal and the concurrent lists persuades us to hold that the president was not empowered to issue the NRO, 2007, as the subjects covered by its Section 2, 6 and 7 fall beyond the scope of these lists,” the judgment held. The ruling termed the NRO an attack on the judiciary.
The court also ordered the federal government and other competent authorities to proceed against former attorney general Malik Muhammad Qayyum by declaring unauthorised, unconstitutional and illegal his acts of writing to various authorities/courts in foreign countries, including Switzerland.
The court noted that no order or any authority was established authorising the former AG to address unauthorised communications and thus the conduct of Malik Qayyum resulted in unlawful abandonment of claims of the government to huge amounts of the allegedly laundered money lying in foreign countries.
The court also expressed its displeasure over the conduct and lack of proper and honest assistance and cooperation to the court by NAB Chairman Nawid Ahsan, the prosecutor general of the NAB and of Additional Prosecutor General Abdul Baseer Qureshi. It suggested the federal government to appoint competent and honest persons who fulfil the criteria outlined in Section 6 of the NAB ordinance. The court asked the government to go through its observations in the Asfandyar Wali case. The verdict regretted that the conduct of the NAB bosses made it impossible for the court to trust them.
However, till such fresh appointments the present incumbents may continue to discharge their obligations strictly in accordance with the law, but obligated them to transmit periodical reports of the actions taken by them to the monitoring cell of this Court, which is being established through succeeding parts of this judgment.
(The News: 20 Jan 2010)
A hushed lull and shock has gripped the PPP leaders and cadres as the prime minister and his cabinet are now caught between the rock and the hard place, since both the options, to accept and implement the judgment or to reject it, would ultimately land the government in a major political crisis.
Prime Minister Gilani had only 24 hours ago promised to the nation in the National Assembly that he would abide by the SC verdict and did not want any clash of institutions. But the NRO judgment will force him to prove whether he is loyal to the party or to the country’s institutions and long-term interests.
The NRO, the most controversial ordinance promulgated by former military dictator Pervez Musharraf, was aimed at giving legal cover to the corruption of politicians and the privileged class. But the SC has virtually cancelled all the benefits and reopened buried cases which could disqualify a big portion of the PPP leadership. The detailed judgment is a reinforcement of the apex court earlier landmark verdict in the NRO case on December 16, 2009, declaring it as never to have existed and against the Constitution, besides holding that the criminal cases could not be withdrawn in the name of reconciliation.
The 287-page detailed ruling was written by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and signed by all the judges of the apex court, including Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, who got retired on January 12.
The detailed judgment, while citing the example of Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos, ruled that the Philippine government had also brought the looted money by the dictator back to the country, which could be taken as a reference.
The NRO was challenged by Dr Mubashar Hassan, former bureaucrat Roedad Khan, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Mian Shahbaz Sharif and others in the apex court in 2007. A 17-member larger bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, in its landmark and the expected judgment on December 16, 2009, had declared the NRO an instrument void ab initio, being ultra vires to various constitutional provisions, including articles 4, 8, 25, 62(f), 63(i)(p), 89, 175 and 227 of the Constitution.
Other members of the bench included Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassadduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice S Khawaja, Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, Justice Rahmat Husain Jafferi, Justice Tariq Parvez and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.
Three judges of the apex court, including Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmed and Justice Jawwad S Khwaja, have also added supporting notes in the detailed judgment.
Earlier, in it short order on December 16, 2009, the court had ruled that ìall steps taken, actions suffered, and all orders passed by whatever authority, any orders passed by the courts of law including the orders of discharge and acquittals recorded in favour of the accused persons, are also declared never to have existed in the eyes of law and resultantly of no legal effect”.
The court had further ruled that all cases in which the accused persons were either discharged or acquitted under “Section 2 of the NRO or where proceedings pending against the holders of public office had got terminated in view of Section 7 thereof, a list of which cases has been furnished to this court and any other such cases/proceedings which may not have been brought to the notice of this court, shall stand revived and relegated to the status of pre-5th of October, 2007 position”.
The detailed judgment noted that the president has an authority under Article 89 of the Constitution to promulgate an ordinance, but he cannot issue temporary legislation, which parliament is not empowered to do.
“A thorough perusal of the federal and the concurrent lists persuades us to hold that the president was not empowered to issue the NRO, 2007, as the subjects covered by its Section 2, 6 and 7 fall beyond the scope of these lists,” the judgment held. The ruling termed the NRO an attack on the judiciary.
The court also ordered the federal government and other competent authorities to proceed against former attorney general Malik Muhammad Qayyum by declaring unauthorised, unconstitutional and illegal his acts of writing to various authorities/courts in foreign countries, including Switzerland.
The court noted that no order or any authority was established authorising the former AG to address unauthorised communications and thus the conduct of Malik Qayyum resulted in unlawful abandonment of claims of the government to huge amounts of the allegedly laundered money lying in foreign countries.
The court also expressed its displeasure over the conduct and lack of proper and honest assistance and cooperation to the court by NAB Chairman Nawid Ahsan, the prosecutor general of the NAB and of Additional Prosecutor General Abdul Baseer Qureshi. It suggested the federal government to appoint competent and honest persons who fulfil the criteria outlined in Section 6 of the NAB ordinance. The court asked the government to go through its observations in the Asfandyar Wali case. The verdict regretted that the conduct of the NAB bosses made it impossible for the court to trust them.
However, till such fresh appointments the present incumbents may continue to discharge their obligations strictly in accordance with the law, but obligated them to transmit periodical reports of the actions taken by them to the monitoring cell of this Court, which is being established through succeeding parts of this judgment.
(The News: 20 Jan 2010)
Government seeks review of NRO verdict
ISLAMABAD: In an interesting move fraught with legal and judicio-political implications, the federal government on Saturday filed a petition in the Supreme Court, praying for reviewing its December 16, 2009, judgment declaring the National Reconciliation Ordinance NRO as violative of various provisions of the Constitution.
Filed through advocate Masood Ahmed Chishti, the government prayed to the court to review the verdict regarding Swiss accounts and re-opening of cases under the NRO.
The government contended that the apex court has made a “mistake” in its short order while ruling that convictions in absentia still hold the field bearing in mind its own judgment in an earlier case and settled legal position in Pakistan vis-a-vis the CrPC that an accused cannot be convicted in absentia.
“The apex court failed to consider the doctrine of past and closed transactions when passing the short order,” the government’s petition said.
The Supreme Court on December 16, 2009, in its landmark judgment, declared the NRO to be an instrument void ab initio, being ultra vires and violative of various provisions of the Constitution, including Articles 4, 8, 25, 62(f), 63(i)(p), 89, 175 and 227.
After thrashing the NRO, the Supreme Court had ruled that all those cases which were abolished under the ordinance stood revived and further ruled that the initial requests for mutual legal assistance, securing the status of a civil party and the claims lodged to the allegedly laundered money lying in foreign countries, including Switzerland, are declared never to have been withdrawn.
The government further contended that the apex court also made a “mistake” while ruling in its short order on the NRO that it had the power to issue directions or orders to the federal government to review requests, claims, and status of cases outside Pakistan while the fact is that such powers and decision fall within the exclusive purview of the executive.
It was further argued that the apex court also made a “mistake” in holding that the then attorney general needed to show to the apex court an order or authority to address communications to various authorities, courts and foreign countries, including Switzerland.
“This honourable court did not fully appreciate that on the same logic the original request by the then attorney general in the year 1997 addressed to the Swiss authorities to institute proceedings was without lawful authority and of no legal effect,” the government contended.
The review petition further contended that the apex court also erred in holding that NAB functionaries should transmit periodical reports of the actions, taken by them to the monitoring cell of the apex court unless this only referred to reports concerning the progress of the judicial proceedings, initiated by NAB as opposed to its investigative and other functions as under the Pakistan common law system, the judiciary is not a part of investigative phase of any accusation.
It prayed that the apex court’s short judgment of December 16, 2009, given in the petition, challenging the NRO be reviewed in the interest of justice.
(The News: 17 Jan 2010)
Filed through advocate Masood Ahmed Chishti, the government prayed to the court to review the verdict regarding Swiss accounts and re-opening of cases under the NRO.
The government contended that the apex court has made a “mistake” in its short order while ruling that convictions in absentia still hold the field bearing in mind its own judgment in an earlier case and settled legal position in Pakistan vis-a-vis the CrPC that an accused cannot be convicted in absentia.
“The apex court failed to consider the doctrine of past and closed transactions when passing the short order,” the government’s petition said.
The Supreme Court on December 16, 2009, in its landmark judgment, declared the NRO to be an instrument void ab initio, being ultra vires and violative of various provisions of the Constitution, including Articles 4, 8, 25, 62(f), 63(i)(p), 89, 175 and 227.
After thrashing the NRO, the Supreme Court had ruled that all those cases which were abolished under the ordinance stood revived and further ruled that the initial requests for mutual legal assistance, securing the status of a civil party and the claims lodged to the allegedly laundered money lying in foreign countries, including Switzerland, are declared never to have been withdrawn.
The government further contended that the apex court also made a “mistake” while ruling in its short order on the NRO that it had the power to issue directions or orders to the federal government to review requests, claims, and status of cases outside Pakistan while the fact is that such powers and decision fall within the exclusive purview of the executive.
It was further argued that the apex court also made a “mistake” in holding that the then attorney general needed to show to the apex court an order or authority to address communications to various authorities, courts and foreign countries, including Switzerland.
“This honourable court did not fully appreciate that on the same logic the original request by the then attorney general in the year 1997 addressed to the Swiss authorities to institute proceedings was without lawful authority and of no legal effect,” the government contended.
The review petition further contended that the apex court also erred in holding that NAB functionaries should transmit periodical reports of the actions, taken by them to the monitoring cell of the apex court unless this only referred to reports concerning the progress of the judicial proceedings, initiated by NAB as opposed to its investigative and other functions as under the Pakistan common law system, the judiciary is not a part of investigative phase of any accusation.
It prayed that the apex court’s short judgment of December 16, 2009, given in the petition, challenging the NRO be reviewed in the interest of justice.
(The News: 17 Jan 2010)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
