Lahore court asks federal government to submit its reply in response to the latest development in a week. PHOTO: FILE
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Thursday suspended the Islamabad High Court’s verdict on the previous government’s amnesty scheme for non-customs paid (NCP) vehicles, Express News reported.
On June 19, IHC declared the amnesty scheme illegal. It also asked the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to seize the 50,000 vehicles sold under this scheme and auction them.
The Lahore court today suspended this verdict and asked the federal government to submit its reply in response to the latest development in a week.
Scheme
On March 3, 2013 former PPP government had approved an amnesty scheme allowing owners to legalise smuggled cars after payment of concessional duty and taxes.
The initiative was directed towards the border regions and tribal areas of Balochistan and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa where driving cars brought from Iran and Afghanistan sans any tax duty or registration is common.
The FBR, for legalising the NCP vehicles, had allowed 60- 70% depreciation in the value for assessment of duty on used cars not older than five years.
March 31 was the last date to avail this opportunity but the caretaker prime minister had extended the date till April 6.
However Khawaja Saad Saleem President Defence of Human Rights of Public Trust filed a petition challenging the amnesty scheme citing it as illegal and discriminatory.
COMMENTS (43)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Babar I don't agree with you as these cars will not be auctioned things in Pakistan are not as you write them sorry but its true. In past years amnesty was offered for cars and people who had cases on them for farud and murders and mushrif gave a clear chit to them. And they live happily ever after.
the problem is not one court or other court decision but the matter is legal and very simple, no law in pakistan constitution favour that the taxes will be off or amnesty for some one will be given. by talking in the scene of law if it is above the law and it is so it will be suspended sooner or later and the tax and dues will be give back and all cars will be handed for fair auction so my dears be relax unlawful is unlawful. when law comes no mercy for any one
A.M. Here is the Eighteenth Amendment. Sir point us the wording giving Provincial HC superiority over the IHC? Thanks.
"The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page . Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved . (April 2010) Amendment XVIII (the Eighteenth Amendment) of the Constitution of Pakistan, was passed by the National Assembly of Pakistan on April 8, 2010, [1] removing the power of the President of Pakistan to dissolve the Parliament unilaterally, turning Pakistan from a semi-presidential to a parliamentary republic , and renaming North-West Frontier Province to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. [2] The package is expected to counter the sweeping powers amassed by the Presidency under former Presidents General Pervez Musharraf and General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq and to ease political instability in Pakistan. [3][4] The bill reverses many infringements on the Constitution of Pakistan over several decades by its military rulers. [3] The amendment bill was passed by the Senate of Pakistan on April 15, 2010 and it became an act of parliament when President Asif Ali Zardari put his signature on the bill on April 19, 2010. It was the first time in Pakistan's history that a president relinquished a significant part of his powers willingly and transferred them to parliament and the office of the prime minister.
Background The power of the President to dissolve the Parliament was enacted by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan during the presidency of Gen. Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq , before it was removed by then- Prime minister Nawaz Sharif during his second term by the Thirteenth Amendment. It was finally restored during the presidency of Gen. Pervez Musharraf by the Seventeenth Amendment . [2] The only democratically elected parliament to fully complete its tenure in the history of Pakistan was from 2003– 2008, albeit under Musharraf, who was widely labelled as a dictator in Pakistan. [4] This bill is the first bill since 1973 to decrease the powers of the President. [5] ↑Jump back a section
Revolutionary Changes In The Constitution It would be better to use the phrase "restoration to the 1973s Constitution of Pakistan" but since some new features were also introduced into the constitution, the word changes has been used therefore. Changes include:
The name of the former president of Pakistan, Gen Zia, has been removed from the text of Constitution North-West Frontier Province has been renamed Khyber-Pakhtoonkhawa The 17th Amendment and Legal Framework Order as introduced by Musharraf has been repealed The ban on third time prime ministership and chief ministership has been lifted Holding constitution in abeyance is tantamount to high treason The council of Common Interest (CCI) has been reconstituted with the prime minister as its chairperson and the body should meet at least once in 90 days A judicial commission will recommend the appointment procedure of superior judges and the final names of judges will be decided by parliamentary commission A Chief Election Commissioner will be appointed through consensus between treasury and opposition Establishment of Islamabad high court and benches of high courts in Mengora and Turbat The concurrent legislative list has been abolished and more autonomy has been vested in the provinces ↑Jump back a section
Impact 292 of the 342 members of the National Assembly , the lower house of Parliament, voted in favour of the amendment. The amendment turns the President into a ceremonial head of state and transfers power to the Prime Minister ,[6] and removes the limit on a Prime Minister serving more than two terms, opening the way for Nawaz Sharif to run again. The North-West Frontier Province is renamed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa , in accordance with the wishes of its Pashtun -majority population. Among other changes, courts will no longer be able to endorse suspensions of the constitution , a judicial commission will appoint judges, and the president will no longer be able to appoint the head of the Election Commission . [3] The bill also enhances provincial autonomy. [7] The President will no longer be able to declare emergency rule in any province unilaterally. [5] ↑Jump back a section
Response An editorial published in Dawn welcomed the amendment and urged parliament to go further and undo the destructive legacy of General Zia 's rule and re-examine the Hudood Ordinance and Blasphemy law in Pakistan . [8] Ahmed Kurd, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan , said "We fully support the 18th Amendment. It is tantamount to the overhauling of the constitution, which had been subverted by military dictators since its inception. In the past, parliaments have just been 'rubber stamps', whereas the present parliament seemed to be well aware of its obligations, and therefore, was 'throwing out' the 'unconstitutional' amendments." [9]
However violence broke out in the North West Frontier Province 's Hazara Division where the Hindko - speaking population opposed the attempts to rename the province Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa. [10] In the aftermath of the 18th Amendment, labour has become a provincial subject and the provincial governments have to regulate labour laws through their respective industrial relations acts or ordinances. [11]"
it's totally a drama creating by IHC....
First the most important question rises here,id est,why government started this amnesty scheme to legalize the smuggled vehicles when the government can't defend its decisions? And secondly behind this writ filed in Islamabad High Court against the amnesty scheme the local cars' manufacturers interference and hidden hands can't ignored because imported vehicles were sold on half prices than locally manufactured vehicles.......
IHC represents and deals involving federal matters but when it affects the provinces the provincial high court has powers over it . after all it represents the District ismlamabad while the latter represents the whole province. please go through 18 th amendmnet
Sir Suppose a car is stolen and sold out to A. Later, the car is recovered and returned to original owner. Can A ask the SC or Government to compensate him? No, because the sale of car was illegal. Same principle of law will apply here. Since the Amnesty by Government was held illegal.
Single or double Bench is not in issue. The issue is HCs jurisdiction. How can a HC be superior to another equal status HC?
Sir if I buy a car from the said scheme, and a decision comes against the amnesty from the Supreme Court. Can I go to Supreme Court for my loss as I didnot done any illegal action why I am punished. Any body please answer
What if IHC now suspends LHC order? How long will this game of musical chair go? Constitution doesn't allow HCs to overstep each other's jurisdiction.
If Amnesty by Government is held unconstitutional then the law doesn't care who gained or suffered in the end transaction resulting from an unconstitutional act.
@kashif all people will be safe once the matter reaches the supreme court not the lower courts.
@Banday: Sir what about those who already spend on vehicles. I am talking about individuals not business man......
LHC has just suspended the verdict given by the IHC for a limited time frame in order to give its final judgment after hearing the FBR point of view.
In the meanwhile Baluchistan speaker assembly has directed the provincial govt to take up case in SC . Lets see what happens.
so in short if you have a registered amnesty car and you drive in Islamabad its illegal and if you drive in rest of Paksitan its Legal .... controversey !!
let the fun begin.....lets see what would happen when Islamabad high court suspendes the decision of LHC and maintain its orignal decision........
Non professional move by IHC, well done LHC, now the question is will the FBR still be impounding vehicles in Islamabad. I believe it will be SC who will give the final verdict, should we take our cars out ? in Islamabad.
LHC should've shown some maturity. This is very low of them to content the decision of another court of its stature. Only the SC should be able to overturn decisions of provincial high courts. I feel our judges in LHC are immature.
Great decision. I bought a small car with my hard money. And I was so tense about the IHC decision. I didn't get my car out of my house. I bought a legalized car by the Govt. of Pakistan. If you want to stop something then stop smugglers. Stop who signs the decisions. But if something is done and common man. General public bought the cars. Smugglers and Officials of custom house made the money which is impossible to get back. How can you blame the common man for this. Thanks to Lahore High Court.
Courts now fighting like politicians over territory
These things will not happen if Courts start giving decisions based more on LAW and LESS on EMOTIONS.
Suspending said SRO after its implementation is itself illegal, looks like some sort of SCAM btw IHC and FBR (from eyes of a common man)
all i know is, log in to customs web site and there would be MANY SROs regarding this amnesty or that amnesty.
dont know when these COURTS will stop making CARTOON of themselves
Well amart guys I accepted your point that LHC is right and IHC is wrong. But question remains .. Can this order be now challanged in IHC ? how can IHC's order was challanged in lHC and not in supreme court ? Its just like your chief minister of sindh is overruling bad order of CM of karachi or lahore .
The decision given by IHC was totally wrong. Where was he , when the scheme was announced ?? where was he , when people starts to registering their car ??? where was he , when FBR was collecting tax and legalising the vehicles??? I salute to Lahore High Court that he made decision totally on right basis. •Reply•Share ›
@ all ...could you please clarify does the decision / order of One high court could be overrided by other high court ? say what would happen when Islamabad high court again cancelles/suspend the decision of lahore high court? according to my inexperience view the Final authority for any decision is Supreme Court ( if someone is not satisfied with the decision of lower court )......even there are procedure that one can also file appeal in the same high court if the party is not satisfied. before moving on to superior court .... Can decision of Peshawar high court in any case especially in death sentence , could be overrided/ suspended by Islamabad high court or lahore high court ? iam totally confuse
I salute to LHC. A very good decision, lot of innocent/ bona fide purchaser are suffered from IHC verdict, IHC verdict against the amnesty was totally wrong.
How come two same bodies of same authority cancel each other out, i am not an expert on this nor on anyother topic but their should be a case against LHC to even approve a case for hearing upon which another same authrity court has given a verdict
The comments is an example of what people thing is right. To catch culprits should be the right course. Now the Government if sincere in ending corruption should step in to reverse the previous Government unlawful scheme void. The persons evaded should then be brought to task. Let's see PML(N) acts or not which would show their sincerity in fighting corruption.
We all are with LHC. GOod decesion by LHC . IHC decesion is baseless and these types of decesion make instability regarding government schemes decesions. Good judgment by LHC.
Does LHC take precedence over IHC?
In my opinion LHC cannot suspend the verdict of IHC, I request someone to give a legal opinion.
We appreciate the decision of LHC because the ultimate consumer was the sufferer. How come such a verdict can be passed when the required formalities were completed and the money was paid. The vehicles were then sold many times in the market. So confiscation of the vehicle from the last purchaser is justified? The IHC decision was baseless.
@ Banday Actually you dont have any knowledge.First go and check the meaning of "suspend".And great decision of LHC in favour of masses.
You people are totally mad. The decision given by IHC was totally wrong. Where was he , when the scheme was announced ?? where was he , when people starts to registering their car ??? where was he , when FBR was collecting tax and legalising the vehicles??? I salute to Lahore High Court that he made decision totally on right basis. ok
what happens if IHC also suspends LHC's suspension of its earlier order. :)
LHC wants pml(n) to decide on this issue! LHC and SC are biased, they support pml(n). (Iam not against their decisions against PPP, i appericiate that but I want courts to remain impartial even in the cases of their beloved pml.n)
It was on the cards as the verdict of Islamabad high court was illogical as the scheme was announced by GOVT OF PAKISTAN and not by an individual then how this act can be unlawful. Also the vehicles were cleared after depositing relevant duties by the individuals in Govt's treasures.
The Jurisdiction of High Courts should be limited to their respective Provinces & geographic boundries. Their too frequent controversial decisions & inclinations affects every one in Pakistan.
Great decision by Lahore high court@Banday:
Finally justice prevails.great
Great decision by Lahore high court
@Banday: Yes, the Government routinely issues exemptions, waivers, and amnesties with the effect of either reducing or negating the tax liability all together. This mechanism is used to benefit favoured industries and those which it wishes to subsidize and support. In the present case it was used to generate revenue by broadening the revenue base. And no, the IHC judgment was not rational, logical, or consistent with law.
Does LHC have superiority over IHC? SC please help.
What kind of behavior is this? One high court suspending orders of another high court? Where will it stop if all the high courts start overturning each others orders?
Will someone from legal fraternity apprises us that whether one high court can suspend the order of another high court? As per my imperfect knowledge, forum of appeal against a high court decision is Supreme Court.
IHC decision appears to be based upon principle of justice. Can government officials on their own discretion reduces tax on any sector? As per recent Supreme Court decision, any imposition of tax without parliamentary approval is unconstitutional. Likewise, a tax on vehicles must have been approved by the parliament in some previous budget. This waiving of parliament-approved tax smacks of collusion between government & business, which is rightly checked by the IHC. Hopefully LHC will take notice of this discretionary usage of authority by government officials to favor their chosen sector.