pakistan

Justice Shah questions ‘unelected judges’ curbing powers of elected representatives

Published

8 months ago

September 16, 2023

admin

Justice Shah questions 'unelected judges' curbing powers of elected representatives

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah – who was part of the three-member Supreme Court bench, which struck down the changes introduced in NAB laws with a 2-1 majority – in his dissenting note noted that the matter was related to the supremacy of Parliament, not of illegal amendments.

“The majority has fallen prey to the unconstitutional objective of a parliamentarian, of transferring a political debate on the purpose and policy of an enactment from the Houses of the Parliament to the courthouse of the Supreme Court.”

Justice Shah said he did not agree with the majority judgment and share the details of his reasoning later because of time shortage. “The basic question is not of NAB amendment but of the parliament elected by 220 million people.”

The majority verdict failed to understand that the State’s powers would be used through the elected representatives, read the dissenting note authored by Justice Shah.

“In my humble opinion, the primary question in this case is not about the alleged lopsided amendments introduced in the NAB law by the Parliament but about the paramountcy of the Parliament, a house of the chosen representatives of about 240 million people of Pakistan.”

Moreover, Justice Shah says, the majority judgment also failed to understand the principle of division of powers [trichotomy of powers] which is the foundation of a democratic system. The question in the case was of parliament’s supremacy, not of illegal amendments, he explained in the dissenting note.

According to Justice Shah, who focused on the court’s jurisdiction and the parliament supremacy, the basic question is of the constitution’s importance and the division of state powers in parliamentary democracy.

In the same line of arguments, he further says the basic question is of the limits of unelected judges’ decision making on a law passed by the parliament. Hence, the majority judgment didn’t grasp the powers enjoyed by the parliament.

Justice Shah’s dissenting note also mentions that the parliament’s authority to legislate never ends. If the legislature can make NAB law, it can also withdraw and amend the same. “By not agreeing with the majority judgment, I hereby rejected the petition.”

The dissenting note came as the three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial declared the amendments introduced by the parliament in NAB laws null and void while also ordering to send the closed cases back to the anti-graft body within seven days.

Post Views: 77

Up Next

JI to hold sit-ins outside governor houses against fuel price hike

Don't Miss

Increase in POL prices challenged in Lahore High Court

Click to comment

pakistan

Court reserves verdict on PTI founder’s bail plea in May 9 case

Published

17 hours ago

May 16, 2024

admin

Court reserves verdict on PTI founder's bail plea in May 9 case

The Islamabad district and sessions court has reserved verdict on the bail plea of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder in the May 9 case.

Judicial Magistrate Omar Shabbir heard the case against the PTI leader registered in Shahzad Town police station.

Naeem Haider Panjhota, Sardar Masroof and Amina Ali appeared before the judge as counsel for the PTI leader.

The lawyers said the case against the PTI founder had not been pursued by an authorised officer. All cases against him had been instituted on the basis of politics and should, therefore, be quashed, they demanded.

The court after listening to the arguments reserved the verdict.

Post Views: 8

pakistan

Rawalpindi court bins plea for initiating case against former commissioner Liaquat Chattha

Published

17 hours ago

May 16, 2024

admin

Rawalpindi court bins plea for initiating case against former commissioner Liaquat Chattha

The Rawalpindi Sessions Court on Thursday dismissed a petition seeking the registration of a case against former Rawalpindi commissioner Liaquat Ali Chattha.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Hakim Khan issued a two-page written order on the petition.

In its order, the court observed that apart from the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), a departmental inquiry was also being conducted against the former commissioner.

If the allegations were proven in the ECP and departmental inquiries, a legal action was certain, the order stated, adding that in this situation, there was no justification for registering a separate case against the former Rawalpindi commissioner.

Two lawyers from Rawalpindi had filed the petition seeking the registration of a case against former commissioner.

In a Feb 18 presser, the former commissioner admitted that elections in his division were “rigged”.

The commissioner accused Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja of being complicit in the rigging and asserted that he, along with the CEC and Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, deserved punishment, even the death penalty, for their injustice.

Chattha expressed remorse for forcing his subordinates to engage in wrongdoing and admitted that winning candidates were made to lose on 13 seats in the Rawalpindi division.

Later on Feb 23, Chattha retracted his earlier statement in a written statement submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

In the statement, Chattha confessed to having supported the narrative of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) about rigging in the general elections and maligning state institutions in exchange for a lucrative position in the future.

He stated he had been made this offer by a Lahore-based PTI leader with whom he had developed a close friendship.

Chattha alleged that “this entire planning had been formulated after consultation and approval of the senior leadership of PTI”.

He stated that this proposal was made by the said [PTI] individual in consideration of the fact that he was about to retire from service after having remained a part of the services for 32 years and enjoyed all the perks and privileges.

Post Views: 7

pakistan

IHC orders Zartaj Gul to appear before court with record in ECL name removal case

Published

17 hours ago

May 16, 2024

admin

IHC orders Zartaj Gul to appear before court with record in ECL name removal case

Islamabad High Court (IHC) has sought the record from Zartaj Gul’s counsel on a petition seeking the name removal of PTI leader and MNA Zartaj Gul from the Exit Control List (ECL).

IHC’s Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri heard the case on Zartaj Gul’s name removal from ECL.

During the hearing, the state counsel stated that Zartaj Gul’s name has been included in the Provisional National Identification List (PNIL).

Upon inquiry from the court, the state counsel informed that Zartaj Gul’s name was included in PNIL on the order of Islamabad and Punjab police, and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) was responsible for including the name in PNIL.

Also read: PTI’s Shibli Faraz, Raja Basharat, Zartaj Gul secure bail in May 9 cases

State counsel added that five cases were registered against Zartaj Gul in Islamabad and Punjab.

The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Usama, disclosed that Zartaj Gul has been granted bail in those cases. He reiterated that the name was being included in the PNIL list despite being on bail.

During the hearing, Justice Tariq Jahangiri inquired about how many cases Zartaj Gul has been granted bail in and ordered the petitioner to appear before the court in the next hearing.

Consequently, IHC has adjourned the case hearing until next week by directing Zartaj Gul’s counsel to appear before the court in the next hearing with records.

Post Views: 7