PBC committees: IHC annuls orders reconstituting committees
Court remands case back to council for deciding the issue
The bench stated that PBC, being the apex body of lawyers, should have followed the mandate of law, adding that the agenda of the meeting was circulated along with an additional agenda, but it did not include the disputed matter which was eventually placed before the PBC during its meeting. PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has annulled a decision to reconstitute committees of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) by the Democratic Group.
However, the two-member division bench comprising Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi and Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui remanded the case back to the PBC to decide and resolve the issue on their own.
“We painfully annul the decision with regard to the issue and remand this case back to the Pakistan Bar Council,” the court said.The bench stated to decide the matter after observing all legal formalities provided under Rules 89 and 90 of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976.
The bench also observed that the dispute for reconstitution of the committees could have been settled in an amicable way by adopting the course provided within the law.
On September 3, Asma Jahangir’s Democratic Group had secured a majority in the PBC when a member of the Professional Group -- who also headed the PBC’s executive committee -- Abdul Fayaz, defected to support the Democratic Group.
The change in allegiance enabled the Democratic Group to gain majority in the body and take over chairmanship of the 21 PBC standing committees from the Professional Group.
Previously, while issuing a stay order against dissolution of the committees, the court had restored all the committees which had been suspended.
The order came in response to a petition filed by Legal Education Committee Chairman Mohammad Shoaib Shaheen, Law Reforms Committee Chairman Chaudhry Ishtiaq Ahmed and Appeals Committee Chairman Tahir Nasarullah Warriach, challenging the dissolution of the committees by the Democratic Group.
In the petition, the petitioners’ counsel Hamid Khan stated that the issue of re-constitution of the committees was neither included in the original regular agenda nor was it made part of the additional agenda circulated a day earlier.
On September 3, he said, vice chairman Dr Muhamamd Farogh Naseem and 10 members of the PBC requested the ex-officio chairman of the PBC, the Attorney-General of Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf Ali, to defer the regular and additional agenda of the meeting in wake of the terrorist attack in Mardan in which many people had been killed and injured.
He added when the chairman refused the request the vice chairman and 10 members decided not to participate in the further proceedings. However, he said, the petitioners were surprised over the news items which appeared on September 4 about the reconstitution of new committees and having no confidence upon the previous committees.
Khan added that the petitioners approached the office concerned but neither were the minutes of the meeting shared nor were any other supporting documents were provided to them. He said that they approached the court when they were debarred from carrying out their official duties.
The bench stated that PBC, being the apex body of lawyers, should have followed the mandate of law, adding that the agenda of the meeting was circulated along with an additional agenda, but it did not include the disputed matter which was eventually placed before the PBC during its meeting.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 15th, 2016.
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has annulled a decision to reconstitute committees of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) by the Democratic Group.
However, the two-member division bench comprising Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi and Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui remanded the case back to the PBC to decide and resolve the issue on their own.
“We painfully annul the decision with regard to the issue and remand this case back to the Pakistan Bar Council,” the court said.The bench stated to decide the matter after observing all legal formalities provided under Rules 89 and 90 of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976.
The bench also observed that the dispute for reconstitution of the committees could have been settled in an amicable way by adopting the course provided within the law.
On September 3, Asma Jahangir’s Democratic Group had secured a majority in the PBC when a member of the Professional Group -- who also headed the PBC’s executive committee -- Abdul Fayaz, defected to support the Democratic Group.
The change in allegiance enabled the Democratic Group to gain majority in the body and take over chairmanship of the 21 PBC standing committees from the Professional Group.
Previously, while issuing a stay order against dissolution of the committees, the court had restored all the committees which had been suspended.
The order came in response to a petition filed by Legal Education Committee Chairman Mohammad Shoaib Shaheen, Law Reforms Committee Chairman Chaudhry Ishtiaq Ahmed and Appeals Committee Chairman Tahir Nasarullah Warriach, challenging the dissolution of the committees by the Democratic Group.
In the petition, the petitioners’ counsel Hamid Khan stated that the issue of re-constitution of the committees was neither included in the original regular agenda nor was it made part of the additional agenda circulated a day earlier.
On September 3, he said, vice chairman Dr Muhamamd Farogh Naseem and 10 members of the PBC requested the ex-officio chairman of the PBC, the Attorney-General of Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf Ali, to defer the regular and additional agenda of the meeting in wake of the terrorist attack in Mardan in which many people had been killed and injured.
He added when the chairman refused the request the vice chairman and 10 members decided not to participate in the further proceedings. However, he said, the petitioners were surprised over the news items which appeared on September 4 about the reconstitution of new committees and having no confidence upon the previous committees.
Khan added that the petitioners approached the office concerned but neither were the minutes of the meeting shared nor were any other supporting documents were provided to them. He said that they approached the court when they were debarred from carrying out their official duties.
The bench stated that PBC, being the apex body of lawyers, should have followed the mandate of law, adding that the agenda of the meeting was circulated along with an additional agenda, but it did not include the disputed matter which was eventually placed before the PBC during its meeting.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 15th, 2016.