Replies sought on making ex-FATA a separate province

Justice Bandial says thinking of forming larger bench to see if this case is admissible or not


Our Correspondent January 28, 2022
The IHC had ruled against Ministry of Interior Employees Cooperative Housing Society encroaching a land allocated for a state-owned college. PHOTO: AFP/FILE

print-news
ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court has sought replies from the federation as well as the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa government over pleas seeking to make the erstwhile Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) a separate province.

Fata was officially merged with K-P after then president Mamnoon Hussain assented to the 25th Amendment on May 31, 2018.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah as well as Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin, heard the case against the 25th Amendment.

Justice Bandial said that the petitioners were of the view that erstwhile Fata could become a separate province instead of being merged with K-P.

“People of Fata say they can't enjoy independence as they are a minority now … Fata was part of the federation.”

Justice Bandial said, “Fata has been merged by parliament which has supreme power.”

Read More: 36 medical seats for ex-FATA students


Justice Bandial said that if Fata was part of the federation then parliament had the power to amend it as the Supreme Court had very limited powers to examine constitutional amendments.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that the petitioners said that the status of federal units could not be changed. “The framers of the Constitution kept the federal units separate in order to maintain their separate culture and status.”

Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin asked whether the Supreme Court had the power to ask the federation to create a new province.

Wasim Sajjad, counsel for the petitioners, said that under the Constitution, it was necessary to hear the opinion of the jirga before making decisions about Fata.

Justice Mansoor said that if the administration of Punjab could be divided into two parts then why Fata cannot be merged?

Lawyer Sajjad said the merger of the federal units and their division into two parts was a different matter.

“The people of FATA were not asked at the time of the merger. Four hundred people sat in parliament and thousands of people decided on the 25th Amendment.”

Justice Bandial said that 400 people are members of parliament including people from Fata.

“The Constitution of Pakistan is based on democracy.”

Justice Mansoor said that if parliament approves the creation of two provinces of Punjab, will the approval of the people there be required?

Lawyer Khawaja Harris said, “It remains to be seen the basic points of the Constitution, which cannot be amended.”

He said, “If Fata is not a federal unit then what is its federal structure? Fata was not part of any province nor was it represented in the provincial parliament.

“There are procedures for creating two or more administrative units in a province. It is also possible to make more than one part of Fata.”

Justice Bandial said that there are important legal issues before the court. “We are thinking of forming a larger bench to see if this case is admissible or not.”

COMMENTS (1)

Muhammad | 2 years ago | Reply I think Pakistan can have 12 provinces based on cultural demographic geographic and socio economic needs and uniqueness with 1 capital territory 1. Karakoram Gilgit Baltistan and chitral dist of KPK with capital gilgit . 2. Kashmir AJK with Muzaffarabad as its capital 3. Hazara hazara div Capital Abbottabad 4. Potohar Rawalpindi div Capital Rawalpindi 5. Punjab Capital Lahore 6. Panjnad south punjab Capital Multan 7. Cholistan Bahawalpur div Capital Bahawalpur 8. Pakhtunkhwa Capital Peshawar 9. Khyber FATA capital Parachinar 10. Bolan northern balochistan Capital Quetta 11. Balochistan capital Gawadar 12. Sindh excluding Karachi capital Hyderabad 13. Kolachi Karachi div Capital Karachi 13. Federal capital territory of Islamabad
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ