Staying impartial: SHC bench declines to hear petition seeking governor rule
Judges have referred matter to SHC chief justice to assign case to another bench
Judges have referred matter to SHC chief justice to assign case to another bench . PHOTO: EXPRESS
KARACHI:
A division bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC) declined on Wednesday to hear a petition seeking imposition of the governor rule and delegation of special powers to the law enforcement agencies to continue operation against criminals in the province.
The bench, comprising justices Ahmed Ali M Sheikh and Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, referred the matter to the SHC chief justice to assign the matter to any other bench.
On Saturday, SHC's senior puisne judge, Justice Sheikh, reportedly left the oath-taking ceremony of the Malir District Bar Association's new governing body after Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah used inappropriate words regarding the judges. This could probably be the reason why the bench members have declined to proceed with the case, said the petitioner, Awami Himayat Tehrik chairperson advocate Maulvi Iqbal Haider, while talking to The Express Tribune.
The petition was filed by advocate Haider, who had moved the court seeking directions for the federal government to proclaim governor rule or delegate powers to law enforcers to continue the operation in Karachi, after the Sindh government refused to extend the Rangers' special policing powers. He had argued that the Sindh government is not acting in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. The petitioner added that a direction was required for the President in such a situation to issue a proclamation in terms of Article 234.
Article 234 states that in a situation where the governance of the province cannot be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, the president may assume to himself, or direct the governor of the province to assume on behalf of the president, all or any of the functions of the government.
Need for action
The Rangers took action against the terrorists in the province and found high-profile politicians to be involved in massive corruption, said Haider. He alleged that many provincial ministers and influential government servants were also involved in corruption, adding that former and sitting ministers had obtained bail before arrest from the SHC in various corruption cases, which were pending against them in the accountability court.
Sindh government was not extending the powers of the paramilitary force in order to hide the corrupt practices of high-profile politicians, he added. He pleaded the court declare that the president is empowered to proclaim an emergency and enforce governor rule under Article 234, as the government had failed to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens in Sindh.
During previous hearings, the court had questioned the maintainability of the plea from the petitioner. Notices were also issued to the relevant federal and provincial authorities to file their comments to the plea.
On Wednesday, the matter was fixed before the bench. Declining to take up the matter, the judges directed the office to place the matter before the SHC Chief Justice to assign the case to another bench, of which they are not members.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 14th, 2016.
A division bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC) declined on Wednesday to hear a petition seeking imposition of the governor rule and delegation of special powers to the law enforcement agencies to continue operation against criminals in the province.
The bench, comprising justices Ahmed Ali M Sheikh and Sadiq Hussain Bhatti, referred the matter to the SHC chief justice to assign the matter to any other bench.
On Saturday, SHC's senior puisne judge, Justice Sheikh, reportedly left the oath-taking ceremony of the Malir District Bar Association's new governing body after Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah used inappropriate words regarding the judges. This could probably be the reason why the bench members have declined to proceed with the case, said the petitioner, Awami Himayat Tehrik chairperson advocate Maulvi Iqbal Haider, while talking to The Express Tribune.
The petition was filed by advocate Haider, who had moved the court seeking directions for the federal government to proclaim governor rule or delegate powers to law enforcers to continue the operation in Karachi, after the Sindh government refused to extend the Rangers' special policing powers. He had argued that the Sindh government is not acting in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. The petitioner added that a direction was required for the President in such a situation to issue a proclamation in terms of Article 234.
Article 234 states that in a situation where the governance of the province cannot be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, the president may assume to himself, or direct the governor of the province to assume on behalf of the president, all or any of the functions of the government.
Need for action
The Rangers took action against the terrorists in the province and found high-profile politicians to be involved in massive corruption, said Haider. He alleged that many provincial ministers and influential government servants were also involved in corruption, adding that former and sitting ministers had obtained bail before arrest from the SHC in various corruption cases, which were pending against them in the accountability court.
Sindh government was not extending the powers of the paramilitary force in order to hide the corrupt practices of high-profile politicians, he added. He pleaded the court declare that the president is empowered to proclaim an emergency and enforce governor rule under Article 234, as the government had failed to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens in Sindh.
During previous hearings, the court had questioned the maintainability of the plea from the petitioner. Notices were also issued to the relevant federal and provincial authorities to file their comments to the plea.
On Wednesday, the matter was fixed before the bench. Declining to take up the matter, the judges directed the office to place the matter before the SHC Chief Justice to assign the case to another bench, of which they are not members.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 14th, 2016.