SC moved to determine army chief’s role in affairs of state

Senior lawyer Raja Irshad files petition in apex court under Article 184 (3) of Constitution

ISLAMBAD:

A senior lawyer, who represented the intelligence agencies in the missing persons case, has approached the Supreme Court to interpret the oath of Chief of Army Staff (COAS) and determine his role in the affairs of the state.

Raja Irshad has filed a petition in the apex court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

“Article 184 (3) of the Constitution is open-ended and the scope of aggrieved person has been enlarged by allowing one person to voice and plead the grievances of the entire society,” Raja said in his petition.

He said that the instant petition involves questions of great public importance with reference to the enforcement of fundamental rights conferred by Chapter 1 of Part-II. “That the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan in Chapter 1 from Article 8 to 28 contains fundamental rights. The people of Pakistan cannot lead honourable and civilised lives without the observance of these fundamental rights in letter and spirit,” it stated.

Read more: SC verdict: Transfers, postings ‘executive’s domain’

“That dignity of man is inviolable under Article 14 of the Constitution it is a very comprehensive and all-embracing right which is trampled upon by the executive organ of the State. This Hon’ble Court is under constitutional obligation to come to the rescue of the teeming millions who are at the mercy of high handedness of the executive organs of the State.”

“In the light of the above submission it os [is] prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare that the State of Pakistan is facing Chaotic Conditions and there is anarchy and Lawlessness due to lack of Constitutional Governance in the Country.”

The petitioner requested the court to direct respondents one to five (the president, prime minister, COAS, Ministry of Law and Justice and Ministry of Defence) to ensure constitutional governance in the country.

“This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to interpret the Oath of Respondent No.3 (army chief) to determine his role in the affairs of the state.

It further stated that any other order or relief deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted to advance the cause of justice.