SC dismisses pleas against Practice and Procedure Ordinance

The constitutional bench stated the ordinance is no longer valid as parliament has passed new laws.


News Desk December 12, 2024
The Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: ONLINE

Listen to article

Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan on Thursday dismissed petitions challenging the validity of the Practice and Procedure Ordinance, noting that the ordinance had expired with the passage of new legislation by Parliament.

The petitions, filed by Chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Barrister Goher Ali Khan, Afraziaab Khattak, Ihtisham Haq, and Akmal Bari, were rejected by the court’s constitutional bench, Express News reported.

The petitioners had sought to annul decisions made under the now-defunct ordinance, particularly actions taken by committees formed under its provisions.

Justice Aminuddin Khan remarked that the Practice and Procedure Ordinance had effectively ceased to exist, as it had been superseded by new laws passed by Parliament.

"The ordinance has expired," he said, while Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar noted that following the passage of the new legislation, the provisions of the ordinance were no longer applicable.

During the hearing, the petitioners’ lawyer argued that decisions made by committees under the ordinance should be declared invalid.

However, Justice Jamal Mandokhail pointed out that once legislation replaces an ordinance, the latter ceases to hold legal ground.

Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar stated that the committee formed under the ordinance has been dissolved, and the decisions of the committee are protected as "past and closed transactions."

Justice Jamal Mandokhail added that the Constitution grants the President of Pakistan the authority to issue ordinances.

Few months ago, PTI challenged the Practice and Procedure Presidential Ordinance in the SC. The petitioner requested the court to declare the ordinance unconstitutional.

He also prayed the court to nullify all decisions of the Practice and Procedure Committee made after the presidential ordinance.

The petitioner also requested the court to bar the newly-formed committee from working till this case is decided.

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