Islamabad:
While the federal government has not yet officially progressed with the 27th constitutional amendment, the murmurs of dissatisfaction and debate have already taken root in the legal fraternity while the Supreme Court resumes hearings on the requests for revision disputing the order of July 12 in the case of reserved seats.
Tensions have further intensified when the president of Islamabad High Bar Association (IHCBA), Wajid Gilani, was released in favor of the proposed amendment, greeting it as an opportunity for “structural reforms” essential in the superior judicial power.
However, the Karachi Bar Association (KBA) retaliated, condemning the position of Gilani and warning that the Sindh lawyers “would strongly resist, by all the necessary means, any attempt to reintroduce the martial law and impose this judicial system of a unit to the Pakistan Federation”.
“Post-conversation order”
Weighing, the former additional prosecutor Tariq Mahmood Khokhar stressed that the original project of the 26th amendment had already been considerably revised under constraint.
“Faced with the opposition, to the chagrin of the established order, many of its amendment clauses had to be removed from the final project. But they were not abandoned as a lost cause,” said Khokhar.
He argued that the current political climate is “conducive” for the reintroduction of these previously omitted provisions throughout the 27th amendment.
“Victory on the battlefield can be attractive. The opposition is almost invariably an intimidating task in Pakistan. More than ever.
Khokhar warned that these dormant clauses could now return easily, saying that the 26th amendment had already propelled Pakistan into “post-dooming order”.
“The 27th proposed amendment will” officially “replace the rule of law already decreased by the rule of law (law as an instrument of control). Expect the reintroduction of military courts, to a federal constitutional court, to a reworked judicial commission, to redefined provincial powers, to a reduced judicial system, to a reduction in fundamental rights, to marginalization of constitutional institutions, An authoritarian and more system of presidency.
“The supreme tragic irony is that the planned victims are, with rare honorable exceptions, voluntary accomplices and apologists for offenses against the Constitution and Democracy,” warned Khokhar.
Meanwhile, Lawyers have begun to question why the committee of constitutional benches, led by justice aminuddin khan and including justice jamal khan mandokhail and justice muhammad ali mazhar, has not yet fixed hearings on petitions against the 26th constitutional amendment, as it moves swiftly on the reserved seats case Deemed Crucial for Enabiling The Ruling Coalition to Secure Two-Thirds Majority in Parliament.
Observers note that the constitutional bench seems to conclude the procedure on the case of seats reserved without delay. However, questions are raised to find out if these hasty risks undermine judicial independence, a protruding characteristic of the Constitution.
In addition, the very training of the constitutional bench is itself under control. A section of the legal community alleges that those who have benefited from the 26th amendment hesitate to judge its legal challenges.
In 2015, the majority of the judges of the SC, in the 21st case of constitutional modification, had judged that the parliamentary form of the government was a protruding characteristic of the Constitution and could not be modified by constitutional amendment.
Judge (RETD) Sheikh Azmat Saeed wrote the judgment, which was approved by eight judges.
According to the verdict, the Constitution contains a regime which reflects its salient characteristics.
“In an effort to discover such protruding characteristics, the material outside the Constitution cannot be invoked safely. The protruding characteristics are verifiable of the Constitution, including democracy, the parliamentary form of the government and the independence of the judiciary”, indicates the decision.
He also declared that the power of the Parliament to modify the Constitution was subject to implicit limitations. According to articles 238 and 239, the Parliament may modify the Constitution, provided that the salient characteristics are not repealed, repealed or substantially modified.
The judgment also affirmed that the Supreme Court is competently acquired to interpret the Constitution and determine whether a constitutional amendment violates its decisive characteristics.
Although the majority judgment remains in force, the legal circles argue that there was still an urgent need for the Superior Court to examine the validity of the 26th constitutional amendment.
They warn that the additional delay in arbitration could open the door to additional constitutional changes, potentially threatening the fundamental principles of the Constitution.
Meanwhile, in its strongly written declaration, the Karachi Bar Association expressed its dismay at the public approval of the president of the IHCBA, Gilani, of an amendment “still unknown to the nation as a whole”.
“Lawyers and the inhabitants of Pakistan expect bars and bars’ advice to be independent votes. They should not act as proxies on behalf of the government and be used to throw the palpors on behalf of the government and declare the support and constitutional amendments to the magnitude of the rubber that have not yet seen the light of day.”
The KBA has argued that making such declarations while the legal community continues to tackle the consequences of the 26th amendment, which was not only rejected by the legal community as a whole but is also Sub Judice, was “entirely unjustified”.
“If there is indeed such an amendment on the anvil and the government has seen fit to secretly share its content with the president of the IHCBA; it should share the same thing with its real voters – which is the legal community.”
“The news is also disseminated according to which such a amendment will include a requirement for oath for the judges of the Superior Court. This is a transparent attempt to intimidate the few judges who remain invented by General Zia and General Musharraf. Sharifuddin Pirzada and Abdul Hameed Dogar,” the press release read.
“In any event, insofar as the scientist president of the IHCBA has announced the support of the constitutional amendments which would allow the judges of the High Court and the lower courts of Islamabad to be transferred and posted in the various provinces (with or without their consent); the association of Karachi Bar considers that not only an attack on judicial independence.
“That there is no doubt, the Sindh lawyers strongly reject and will resist, by all the necessary means, any attempt to reintroduce the martial law and to impose this judicial system of a unit on the Pakistan Federation,” warned the association.
