Lawyers on strike to protest arrests of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha halt all legal proceedings, Islamabad High Court PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
Upholding the government’s decision to ban book imports from India and Israel, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) held that the right to read is not absolute and may be subject to restrictions imposed by law, including those justified by foreign policy reasons.
The Court also noted that the foreign policy of the Federal Government cannot be examined under judicial review by any court and its examination or reconsideration is the sole prerogative of the executive.
“We have recognized the right to read as flowing from the right to life under Article 9 of the Constitution, this right is not absolute but limited. Article 9 itself expressly provides that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty “except in accordance with law”.
“In the present case, the law has taken its course. The Federal Government has acted within its executive power in regulating trade,” states the 21-page judgment authored by Justice Aamer Farooq while upholding Regulatory Orders (SRO) Nos. 927 and 928(I)/2019, issued by the Federal Government pursuant to its constitutional and statutory authority, reflecting considerations of foreign policy, national security and discretion.
Even though the Lahore High Court also upheld the validity of the SROs and declared them intra vires the Constitution and the relevant statutory framework, it nevertheless issued certain instructions to the federal government.
However, the executive challenged these instructions before the highest court.
The FCC ruling notes that the executive power of the federation rests with the federal government and is exercised by the prime minister and the cabinet on behalf of the president.
“Under Article 97 of the Constitution, the Federation is empowered to exercise executive power in matters within the legislative competence of Parliament.
“In determining the extent of the executive power of the Federation, it is therefore necessary to examine the extent of the legislative powers of Parliament. At this stage, we take note of the reason given by the petitioners for imposing the impugned ban, namely, considerations of national security and foreign policy. We refrain from examining the nature of Pakistan’s relations with the said countries or the political reasons underlying the adoption of such measures,” the judgment said.
The judgment further states that courts have consistently held, over the years, that they should not interfere in matters relating to national security and foreign policy.
