SHC dismisses plea against amendment bill

Notes that court cannot intervene as parliament is yet to debate, approve the package


Our Correspondent October 15, 2024

print-news
KARACHI:

The provincial high court in Sindh (SHC) has dismissed a petition filed against the proposed 26th Constitutional Amendment, noting that the court cannot intervene at this point given the fact that parliament is yet to debate and approve the bill.

A division bench led by SHC Chief Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and comprising Justice Jawwad Akbar Sarwana on Monday took up a petition filed by Muhammad Ghulam Rehman Korai and some others lawyers through their counsels Ebrahim Saifuddin and Tahir Mehmood.

Saifuddin argued that the federal cabinet had approved the draft of the constitutional amendment on September 14. However, due to the lack of a two-thirds majority, the draft could not be presented in parliament on September 15. The entire nation has been kept in the dark regarding the issue of the constitutional amendment.

He said the federal minister for law stated that the draft has not yet been presented before the federal cabinet. The draft of the amendment circulating on social media contains several clauses that go against the independence of the judiciary.

"The federal cabinet should be stopped from approving the proposed constitutional amendment. The draft of the amendment should be made public, and a 60-day period should be given for public debate. The draft has already been brought to the assembly," he requested.

CJ Siddiqui noted that parliament consists of

representatives of 240 million people.

In conversation with the petitioner's lawyer, he asked if he had read the Supreme Court's judgment on the Practice and Procedure Act, 2023.

When the lawyer replied in the affirmative, the CJ lamented that despite that, he had "dared" to file such a petition, while asking him as to how this petition was maintainable.

COMMENTS

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