Skip to main content

Practice & procedure law in line with SC rules, court told

• PML-Q counsel says legislation aimed at promoting independence of judiciary

• Petitioner says parliament encroaching on ‘exclusive domain’ of top court


ISLAMABAD: The Pakis­tan Muslim League-Q (PML-Q) on Monday pleaded before the apex court that the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 — a law that envisions the formation of a committee of three senior judges to form benches on cases involving constitutional matters of public importance — was aimed at promoting the independence of judiciary, the rule of law, and the right to access to justice and fair trial.


The party, represented by its counsel Zahid F. Ebra­him, said Supreme Court rules provide that the legislature can determine the practice and procedure of the Sup­reme Court in relation to the constitution of benches, in particular. Parliament has the right to enact the subject legislation and has done so strictly in accordance with the law and the Consti­tution, the response said.








At the last hearing, a full court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa had sought replies by Sept 25, while the court will take up the matter again on Oct 3.


Khawaja Tariq Raheem, on behalf of petitioner Raja Amer Khan, had requested the court to declare the act illegal since parliament cannot change the essence of Article 184 (3) through an ordinary law or intrude in any manner in respect of the rules framed by the Supreme Court (1980 Rules), which have the backing of the Constitution.


Advocate Raheem contended that parliament may be supreme when it makes a constitutional amendment, but even in such cases there were checks and balances in the Constitution as specified in the preamble or the Objectives Resolution.


The petitioner also contended that the jurisdiction of Article 199 and recourse to the high courts would not be an adequate and efficacious means of checking any inroads by the legislature into the spheres of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court when it is exercising its original jurisdiction under Article 184 (3).


He contended that Article 191 gave the power to the Supreme Court to make rules and it was this power, which was used in SRO 1159-i/80 brought in the 1980 rules for regulating the business of the Supreme Court.


In other words, the rules have “constitutional backing” since they were made by the full court to ensure that the apex court works within a definite mandate and the overall fundamental objective enumerated in the Objectives Resolution that the independence of the judiciary was to be fully secured.


The reply argued that the rules of each organ of the state were beyond encroachment by the other organs since the rule-making power was an exclusive domain of each organ and could not be encroached upon by any other organ of the state.


PML-Q’s response


On the other hand, the PML-Q argued that the primary and central function of the legislative branch was to create laws and the courts must give weight to the purpose of the law remembering that legislation promotes social policy and was a tool for achieving societal goals. “This subjective feature becomes a key factor in interpreting the statute. Therefore in the first instance, the role of the courts is to safeguard and actualise these laws in the public interest.”


The reply argued that the Supreme Court was not concerned with the wisdom or prudence of the legislation but only with its constitutionality.


In the context of the act, in particular, the right of appeal, Entry 55 of the Federal Legislative List (FLL) of the Constitution specified the field of legislation to include “enlargement of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court”. Hence the legislature was legally warranted to legislate the 2023 act, he added.


The counsel cited a judgement of the court, stating, on the one hand, it limits the legislative power of parliament to making of any law on the jurisdiction and powers of the apex court and on the other hand it empowers parliament to make laws for enlargement of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the conferring of supplemental powers.


“It is respectfully submitted that pursuant to Article 191, the parliament clearly has the right to legislate on matters pertaining to the practice and procedure of the Supreme Court. As a matter of fact… Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules 1980, itself contemplates that parliament may legislate on this subject.”


Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2023


http://dlvr.it/SwcCGk

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pragmatic steps taken to implement Axle Load Control regime on NH&MP

Islamabad: Ministry of Communications has taken pragmatic steps to implement the Axle Load Control regime on Motorways & National Highways in the country. Sole objective of this move is to control travelling of overloaded vehicles which lead to fatal accidents besides damaging the national asset of road network of billions of rupees.Prior to implementation of axle load control regime, a technical committee was formed, consisting of officers from Ministry of Communications and National Highway Authority which remained in constant contacts with transport community, Members of the Chambers of Commerce and stakeholders hailing from all the provinces. This technical committee visited their offices and held detailed discussions in series of meetings and took them into confidence to facilitate implementation of Axle Load Control regime. The stakeholders assured of their full cooperation and subsequently, implementation of Axle Load Control was realized which is in progress.It is worth to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

CJP questions how ‘clarification order’ made it to website

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has raised nine questions in a letter to the Supreme Court’s registrar, seeking clarification on how a Sept 14 clarification order was uploaded to the top court’s website. The Sept 14 order, issued by eight judges led by senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, criticised the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for failing to implement the Supreme Court’s July 12 judgement, which declared the PTI eligible for reserved seats in parliament. In his letter dated Sept 21, the CJP wondered who directed the uploading of the Sept 14 clarification order on the Supreme Court’s website. His inquiry followed a note from the Deputy Registrar (Judicial), who flagged the issue of the order’s appearance on the website. The note questioned how the order was uploaded when no cause list had been issued, no notices had been sent to the parties, and the order had not been received by the deputy registrar’s office until 8pm on the...
Post a Comment
Read more

UN awards 2 Pakistani female peacekeepers for gender advocacy

The United Nations has awarded two Pakistani female peacekeepers with the Gender Advocacy Award for their “outstanding performance”, a statement from the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said. In a statement issued on Thursday, the ISPR said the awards were presented to Major Sania Safdar, part of the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Cyprus, and Major Komal Masood, who served in the Central African Republic, “for their outstanding performance and commitment in promoting the ideals of UN”. The accolades were presented by the under-secretary general in the UN’s Department for Peace Operations at its New York headquarters. “While serving in [an] international environment, both officers demonstrated exceptional professionalism [and] dedication,” the ISPR noted. It added that the two peacekeepers “made [a] significant contribution to Mission’s Peace and Stability efforts, especially with regards to advancing women’s meaningful participation in Peacekeeping Operations within the ...
Post a Comment
Read more