'26th Amendment has no public benefit'

Lawyers agree move done to clip judiciary's wings

LAHORE:

With the ruling alliance still patting itself on the back and congratulating the public on the passage of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which is mainly related to judicial reforms, the majority of legal experts have rubbished claims that the changes benefit the public. In fact, many lawyers, even those belonging to government parties, have gone as far as to say that there is nothing in it for the common man.

The opinion of those belonging to the government vary on the benefits of the legislation, but there is no confusion over the law having a negligible effect solving the troubles of the local judicial process.

Many see this legislation as a move to prevent the Supreme Court's senior-most judge, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, from becoming the chief justice of Pakistan. The legal experts believed this is a blatant attempt to tame the judiciary, and ensure that no government-challenging CJ comes takes the reins of the Supreme Court.

There is also speculation that the overnight amendment will prove to be troublesome in the long run. Prime Minister of Pakistan Shehbaz Sharif, during a recent cabinet meeting, claimed that the amendment intends to address inordinate delays in cases. PPP Central Punjab has even announced holding a celebration on October 31 over the passage of the amendment.

Former Attorney General of Pakistan Irfan Qadir, when asked what benefit the amendment beings for the general public, categorically replies by saying none.

"There is nothing in it for the people. The general as public is often least concerned with things happening in the Centre and more concerned with things that concern their lives." However, he presents the argument that the legislation is the need of the hour, and a move a in the right direction.

"Judicial activism has been most detrimental for the system of the country. The judiciary is not the supreme authority in the country." He further clarifies that to overhaul the judicial system and gear it to towards speedy justice, a 27th constitutional amendment will be required.

A senior lawyer, who happens to be a PML-N office bearer, acknowledges that this legislation is only to reign in the judiciary. According him, the judiciary had started seeing itself as omnipotent and the most powerful institution of the country since 2008.

He says that although violating the principle of seniority will help the government handpick its man as the CJ, it will prove to be detrimental for the system in the long run. He adds the hasty amendment will provide nothing more than short-term benefit to the government.

"Unfortunately. governments don't think ahead and that has been the root cause of most of our woes." He says that there are no terms of reference over the selection criteria for the CJ, so the basis of the decision will leave a huge question mark.

He continues that in reality, the discretionary decision will be based on the principle of quid pro quo. The lawyer adds that instead of fixing the system of appointing the chief of army staff, the PML-N has tainted the process of the CJ's appointment. He says that parliament is supreme and should remain supreme come what may, but the appointment process of the CJ proves, in spades, the malafide intentions behind this legislation.

He says there are 2.2 million cases in the lower judiciary. "Compare that to a little over 60,000 cases in the SC. To put things into further context, the number of constitutional cases in the SC is less than a fraction of that."

Legal analyst Barrister Saad Rasool also concurs with this opinion, saying the purpose of the amendment is not to address issues of the general public. He adds the amendment has a clear, yet sinister design.

Rasool continues that the that after the retirement of current SC CJ Qazi Faiz, a petition against this amendment might land in the apex court and is likely to be taken up by a full bench. He adds there is a part of the amendment that might be struck down.

PPP leader Qamar Zaman Kaira, whose party was at the forefront of this amendment and projecting it as gift to people, argues that the changes will directly benefit the general public. He says the constructional bench will take away the bulk load of cases before the SC. "Now, the court can solely focus on civil and criminal cases pending before it. When asked that while thousands of cases were pending before the SC, but million in lower courts, Qaira points out the latter is a provincial subject and for those governments to resolve.