News
CJ raps change in Objective Resolution
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) put up a question before counsels of the parties to the case regarding Eighteenth Amendment, “Was any constitutional amendment ever invalidated by court in the country, Geo News reported Tuesday.Today, the counsel of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Hamid Khan, who started his arguments yesterday, began today’s proceedings with his pleading before a 17-member larger SC’s bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, hearing various identical petitions against Eighteenth Amendment.
Giving arguments before the court, the senior lawyer, one of the architects of 1973 Constitution and one of the petitioners Abul Hafeez Pirzada demanded the record of the discussion in the Parliament for 73 Constitution be handed to them.
Hamid Khan said the concept of judges’ appointment through a judicial commission has been extracted from the South Africa.
Khan continued the Judicial Commission is present only in South Africa among countries having the same laws, adding the country has presidential system of government, where the parliament does not intrudes in the affairs.
The judicial commission in South Africa makes hiring from the Supreme Court to the level of magistrates, he said.
Justice Saqib Nisar said, ‘It is banned in Britain for a member of the Parliament to be the member of the Judicial Commission,’ adding the Commission in Britain stirs into action under special circumstances.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry queried Khan, ‘Has any Constitutional Amendment ever been annulled in Pakistan by court? Is there any such antecedent in the county?’
Responding, Khan said, ‘No constitutional amendment was set aside; however, the judicial reviews of these amendments were made.’
However, Indian SC jettisoned the 25th Amendment, he asserted saying, “Our constitution is at variance with the Indian one.’
Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday remarked, ‘The courts in every country are dealt as such and later on, the settlements are worked out.’
‘It occurred in every country and nation including Pakistan that courts deliver only to be followed by a fresh legislation or the amendment in the Constitution (overriding the courts’ verdict).’
Justice Ramday said, ‘We need not worry in this connection, hence.’
The CJ Chaudhry said, ‘The clause regarding the rights of minorities was abolished from the Objective Resolution in 1985,’ terming the act as a criminal offence of negligence.
He lauded the present government saying, ‘The credit goes to the government which, after 25 years, took notice of the brazen act of removing the clause relating the minorities’ rights,’ adding Objective Resolution has always been the part to the Constitution.
Hamid Khan averred that Gen (rtd) Ziaul Haq committed the offence of his own accord and it was quite criminal of the then Parliament which took no note of the grave offence of amending the Resolution.
Justice Jawad S. Khawaja said the basic documents could not be altered.
The court later on, adjourned the hearing till tomorrow.
Courtesy www.Geo.tv