Army Act: Change of approach allows PTI govt to avert row with opposition
PTI govt takes parliament’s route for COAS tenure extension
PM Imran Khan and COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa. PHOTO: EXPRESS
The PTI led government has decided to avert a possible clash with the superior judiciary by implementing the Supreme Court judgment calling for legislation to determine an army chief’s tenure.
The Supreme Court on November 28 gave the government six months to legislate and iron out the lacunae in the reappointment or extension of tenure of army chief – paving the way for the incumbent, Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa, to stay on until a new law determined his terms of service.
A three-member bench of the apex court, comprising former chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa, Justice Mian Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, had issued the verdict in the high-stake case following the state’s chief law officer submitted an undertaking that parliament would bring in a new law on the matter within six months.
The government had, however, approached the Supreme Court last week seeking a review of its November 28 verdict. The review had been filed after the government failed to muster ‘desirable support’ from the major opposition parties on proposed legislation on the apex court’s direction.
However, now the government would once again push for legislation as the main opposition group, the PML-N, has agreed to support the government in the legislative process.
Previously, the PML-N was divided on the issue.
The younger Sharif – the PML-N President Shehbaz – was ready to support the government, but the elder Sharif – former premier Nawaz – had a different opinion.
Earlier, Nawaz Sharif, who is no longer president of the party but still pulls the strings, had agreed to lend support to the proposed legislation, but with a caveat.
“He was amenable to supporting the government legislation to fix the army chief’s tenure but was noncommittal to giving a legal cover to the reappointment/extension of an army chief.
“However, Shehbaz Sharif’s view has dominated in the decision-making process and the PML-N has decided to support the government’s legislation,” said a source. He said Nawaz has green-lighted his younger brother to settle the issue with the government.
PML-N ‘gives the nod’ to Army Act amendments
Talking about the reasons for opting for legislation rather than pushing for a review petition, a senior PTI lawyer admitted that the decision reflects that the government is unsure if the apex court would accept the review petition.
Legal experts enumerate more than one reason why the government decided against a review route.
Firstly, according to them, the apex court gave the verdict with the consent of the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Anwar Mansoor Khan who had undertaken appropriate legislation on the matter.
Interestingly, the government, in its review petition, did not give an explanation for approaching the SC after the AGP’s undertaking.
Secondly, under the Supreme Court Rules, the bench that heard the main case will hear the review petition, which has a limited scope. A huge percentage of such review petitions are dismissed unless a petitioner highlights some “glaring error” in the judgment.
Thirdly, the role of the superior bars is significant in this matter. The superior bars are opposed to the army chief’s extension. If the court accepts the review petition, then the lawyers’ community may agitate
Fourthly, a recent “malicious campaign” against the judiciary, especially following the Musharraf treason case verdict, might influence the government’s case in the apex court.
In view of these reasons, it was tough for the federal government to get immediate relief and it decided to opt for the first option that is legislation. Senior lawyers appreciate the government's decision. They say the SC has fewer options to reverse its ruling.
However, it is not clear whether the government’s legal team will still press review petition after completion of the legislative process.
A senior government official said now there is no urgency to press the review petition. “It is better that the government should withdraw its review petition,” he said.
It is also learnt that Law Minister Dr Farogh Naseem has moved an application seeking the court’s permission to allow him to argue the review petition.
He says there is no legal requirement for him to plead the case after tendering resignation as law minister. The law minister is also referring to the SC’s judgment which allows him to argue the case as law minister.
However, superior bars representatives have announced that they will strongly resist if the SC allows law minister to argue the case.
The Supreme Court Bar Association President Qalb-e-Hassan wondered why Naseem resigned as law minister first time and came in the court to argue the case on behalf of the army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa.
The Supreme Court on November 28 gave the government six months to legislate and iron out the lacunae in the reappointment or extension of tenure of army chief – paving the way for the incumbent, Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa, to stay on until a new law determined his terms of service.
A three-member bench of the apex court, comprising former chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa, Justice Mian Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, had issued the verdict in the high-stake case following the state’s chief law officer submitted an undertaking that parliament would bring in a new law on the matter within six months.
The government had, however, approached the Supreme Court last week seeking a review of its November 28 verdict. The review had been filed after the government failed to muster ‘desirable support’ from the major opposition parties on proposed legislation on the apex court’s direction.
However, now the government would once again push for legislation as the main opposition group, the PML-N, has agreed to support the government in the legislative process.
Previously, the PML-N was divided on the issue.
The younger Sharif – the PML-N President Shehbaz – was ready to support the government, but the elder Sharif – former premier Nawaz – had a different opinion.
Earlier, Nawaz Sharif, who is no longer president of the party but still pulls the strings, had agreed to lend support to the proposed legislation, but with a caveat.
“He was amenable to supporting the government legislation to fix the army chief’s tenure but was noncommittal to giving a legal cover to the reappointment/extension of an army chief.
“However, Shehbaz Sharif’s view has dominated in the decision-making process and the PML-N has decided to support the government’s legislation,” said a source. He said Nawaz has green-lighted his younger brother to settle the issue with the government.
PML-N ‘gives the nod’ to Army Act amendments
Talking about the reasons for opting for legislation rather than pushing for a review petition, a senior PTI lawyer admitted that the decision reflects that the government is unsure if the apex court would accept the review petition.
Legal experts enumerate more than one reason why the government decided against a review route.
Firstly, according to them, the apex court gave the verdict with the consent of the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Anwar Mansoor Khan who had undertaken appropriate legislation on the matter.
Interestingly, the government, in its review petition, did not give an explanation for approaching the SC after the AGP’s undertaking.
Secondly, under the Supreme Court Rules, the bench that heard the main case will hear the review petition, which has a limited scope. A huge percentage of such review petitions are dismissed unless a petitioner highlights some “glaring error” in the judgment.
Thirdly, the role of the superior bars is significant in this matter. The superior bars are opposed to the army chief’s extension. If the court accepts the review petition, then the lawyers’ community may agitate
Fourthly, a recent “malicious campaign” against the judiciary, especially following the Musharraf treason case verdict, might influence the government’s case in the apex court.
In view of these reasons, it was tough for the federal government to get immediate relief and it decided to opt for the first option that is legislation. Senior lawyers appreciate the government's decision. They say the SC has fewer options to reverse its ruling.
However, it is not clear whether the government’s legal team will still press review petition after completion of the legislative process.
A senior government official said now there is no urgency to press the review petition. “It is better that the government should withdraw its review petition,” he said.
It is also learnt that Law Minister Dr Farogh Naseem has moved an application seeking the court’s permission to allow him to argue the review petition.
He says there is no legal requirement for him to plead the case after tendering resignation as law minister. The law minister is also referring to the SC’s judgment which allows him to argue the case as law minister.
However, superior bars representatives have announced that they will strongly resist if the SC allows law minister to argue the case.
The Supreme Court Bar Association President Qalb-e-Hassan wondered why Naseem resigned as law minister first time and came in the court to argue the case on behalf of the army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa.