Govt eyes right to appeal SC decree
Federal govt seeks to add two new clauses to Article 184
Federal govt seeks to add two new clauses to Article 184. PHOTO: PPI
ISLAMABAD:
The federal government on Friday introduced a constitutional amendment bill in the National Assembly, proposing a right to appeal against an order of the Supreme Court passed in suo motu cases.
A larger bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing the Panamagate case under this jurisdiction. The Supreme Court is empowered to take suo motu action on any matter of public interest under the same jurisdiction.
Panama leaks case: PTI submits 'evidence' against Sharif family
The Constitution (24th Amendment) Bill, 2016, suggests adding two new clauses – 184 (4) and 184 (5) – to Article 184 (Original jurisdiction of Supreme Court) of the Constitution.
The clauses propose that anyone aggrieved by an order passed by the Supreme Court under Clause (3) of Article 184 could file an appeal in the Supreme Court and such appeals would be heard by a bench larger than the bench passing the order.
Currently, the only remedy available to aggrieved persons under Article 184 (3) is a review petition and that too is heard by the same bench that earlier passed the order.
Clause 3 of Article 184 provides: “Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, the Supreme Court shall, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II is involved, have the power to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article.”
The new clause suggests: “Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Supreme Court under clause 3 may, within 30 days of the passing of such order, prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court.”
While the proposed clause 5 states: “An appeal preferred under Clause (4) shall be heard by a bench larger than the bench which had passed the order under appeal.”
Will only scrutinise Sharif family's foreign properties, not PM's entire life: SC
Hailing the decision, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Ali Zafar said that it would ensure a fair trial and grant the right to appeal against Supreme Court orders to all aggrieved persons.
Zafar, however, said that the government’s timing to introduce the bill was inappropriate. “This has been tabled at a crucial time when an apex court bench is hearing Panamagate case under Article 184 (3).”
Companies Ordinance 2016 tabled
The government tabled the Companies Ordinance, 2016, in the National Assembly with stricter provisions, making it mandatory for all corporate entities to disclose all assets and subsidiaries abroad.
Already promulgated as a presidential decree, the government claimed new provisions would ensure fair investigations into terror-financing, money-laundering and tax evasion cases.
Transgender representation in NA
Pukhtoonkhwa Milli Awami Party chief Mahmood Khan Achakzai condemned an incident in which a transgender person was tortured in Sialkot, saying that the community should be given representation in the National Assembly.
“One National Assembly seat must be reserved for the transgender community,” Achakzai observed. He was speaking on a point of order.
Legislators also criticised the government for its poor response on the Gadani fire incident.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 19th, 2016.
The federal government on Friday introduced a constitutional amendment bill in the National Assembly, proposing a right to appeal against an order of the Supreme Court passed in suo motu cases.
A larger bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing the Panamagate case under this jurisdiction. The Supreme Court is empowered to take suo motu action on any matter of public interest under the same jurisdiction.
Panama leaks case: PTI submits 'evidence' against Sharif family
The Constitution (24th Amendment) Bill, 2016, suggests adding two new clauses – 184 (4) and 184 (5) – to Article 184 (Original jurisdiction of Supreme Court) of the Constitution.
The clauses propose that anyone aggrieved by an order passed by the Supreme Court under Clause (3) of Article 184 could file an appeal in the Supreme Court and such appeals would be heard by a bench larger than the bench passing the order.
Currently, the only remedy available to aggrieved persons under Article 184 (3) is a review petition and that too is heard by the same bench that earlier passed the order.
Clause 3 of Article 184 provides: “Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, the Supreme Court shall, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II is involved, have the power to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article.”
The new clause suggests: “Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Supreme Court under clause 3 may, within 30 days of the passing of such order, prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court.”
While the proposed clause 5 states: “An appeal preferred under Clause (4) shall be heard by a bench larger than the bench which had passed the order under appeal.”
Will only scrutinise Sharif family's foreign properties, not PM's entire life: SC
Hailing the decision, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Ali Zafar said that it would ensure a fair trial and grant the right to appeal against Supreme Court orders to all aggrieved persons.
Zafar, however, said that the government’s timing to introduce the bill was inappropriate. “This has been tabled at a crucial time when an apex court bench is hearing Panamagate case under Article 184 (3).”
Companies Ordinance 2016 tabled
The government tabled the Companies Ordinance, 2016, in the National Assembly with stricter provisions, making it mandatory for all corporate entities to disclose all assets and subsidiaries abroad.
Already promulgated as a presidential decree, the government claimed new provisions would ensure fair investigations into terror-financing, money-laundering and tax evasion cases.
Transgender representation in NA
Pukhtoonkhwa Milli Awami Party chief Mahmood Khan Achakzai condemned an incident in which a transgender person was tortured in Sialkot, saying that the community should be given representation in the National Assembly.
“One National Assembly seat must be reserved for the transgender community,” Achakzai observed. He was speaking on a point of order.
Legislators also criticised the government for its poor response on the Gadani fire incident.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 19th, 2016.