Contempt of court law: SC likely to challenge blanket immunity for govt officials
As the government rolls up its sleeves to alter the contempt law, the Supreme Court has already made it crystal clear that it will not compromise its jurisdiction to take up such cases – setting the stage for yet another clash between the executive and the judiciary, even if the government succeeds in passing the proposed law.
Interestingly, the Supreme Court touched on the subject in detail, days before the federal cabinet approved the draft law, when it released its detailed judgment in former prime minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s contempt case on July 3.
“The Constitution contains a scheme for the distribution of powers between various organs and authorities of the State, and to the superior judiciary is allotted the very responsible though delicate duty of containing all other authorities within their jurisdiction by investing the former with powers to intervene whenever any person exceeds his lawful authority,” said the detailed verdict.
The cabinet of Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, whose future also hangs in the balance for the same reason that caused his predecessor’s disqualification, recently gave approval to the draft law and sent it to parliament to curtail the judiciary’s powers in matters pertaining to contempt of court.
The Supreme Court verdict goes on to state that it will not compromise on its review jurisdiction, as the judges of the superior courts are under a solemn oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”.
The judgment states that “after all, if orders or directions of the highest court of the country are defied by the highest executive of the country then others in the country may also feel tempted to follow the example leading to a collapse or paralysis of administration of justice besides creating an atmosphere wherein judicial authority and verdicts are laughed at and ridiculed.”
The judgment also cited as precedent when President Asif Ali Zardari was denied administering oath back in 1999 by the then Senate chairman, but the courts overruled the chairman’s ruling and intervened to provide relief to Zardari.
The judgment also mentioned the NRO cases, saying they were taken up by the courts after parliament did not take any decision to validate the ordinance and left it to the court to make a final decision. The detailed judgment also expressed its respect for parliament. The top judge of the country authored the judgment, which explains the circumstances under which the chief executive of the country was tried, convicted and disqualified.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry summed up the court’s respect for democracy and rule of law in the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) case: “This court referred all such ordinances, including the NRO, 2007 to parliament for the purpose of validation or otherwise. This act of the court demonstrates the respect it has for the legislature because the court instead of determining the fate of those ordinances itself left it to be decided by parliament or the concerned provincial assembly.”
Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2012.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732549780-0/Speaker-Na-photo-22_04_2014-(1)1732549780-0-270x192.webp "negotiations underway between government pti over sit in venue")
The country is on the brink of financial bankruptcy and the Government is protecting the corrupt and crooks and undermining the last hope of the people. All the allied parties are equally responsible for all the mis-deeds the Government has done during the past four years. God save us from these plunders and give the people enough sense to elect honest people in the coming elections.
I'm amazed by the pro-PPP comments on these articles. Look at the state of the country, This government has led Pakistan to deeper mess than it has ever been in in the last 65 years.
PPP took and still is taken the biggest amount of debt in Pak history. Inflation went from 1 USD = 60 PKR to 1 USD = 90 PKR. They are just printing more notes every motnh. PPP and Zardari tola show complete disregard for any Supreme Court order. They've delayed and tried to halt any legal process against any of their members by scum tactics (Exhibition A: How Gilaani had to be sent back by force in the end) PPP and tola didnt nothing to improve the power situation. The industry sector is almost dead. Our yearly GDP growth can't get any worse. 8-16 hours of loadshedding every day. They added a total of 0 Megawatts to the national grid. Raja Rental and others just got commission and added thousands of megawatts on PAPER, but not in reality. Zardari doesnt have the moral courage to face the public and the courts. If he's such a saint, why not say 'im open to any inquiries from the public and courts'. Last 5 years he's been repeating the same line 'im immunie by article 48 (in other words , saying 'mein chor hoon lekin tum mera kuch nahi bigaar sakty'). He and his party are mocking the nation. All teh allies, ANP, MQM are partners in crime, supporting each and every illegitimate move, like the contempt law modification. This system won't change unless all these parties are kicked out of pakistan. sighThe constitution or law is not about what one wants or wishes. This is a written code, so don’t try to poke your nose where you don’t have the authority. Actually this is the problem of Pakistan where everyone tries to be an intellectual despite the fact that whether it is a no go area for him/her. Hence he/she turns out to be a pseudo intellectual. The progression requires tolerance and here every one wants that the institutions whether Supreme Court or Parliament comply with their wishes. However, the judicial hyper activism never allows running democracy freely, no matter how bad it is. It’s a gradual process; try to bring change by casting your votes. Judges are not public representatives; their duty is to provide justice between two parties. I wonder when judiciary itself becomes a party on one side, how the reason for existence of an independent judiciary will hold out?
It's really sad & devastating that this so called Democratic government has focused all it's powers just to save their seats & face. What about those people who unfortunately elected them & expect them to resolve their issues. Regarding to the first comment by Mr. S.A.K Rahmani; you are right about the fact that unfortunately a dictator was allowed by the court to function here but supreme court has repeatedly accepted this mistake and has done a lot to rectify it. So, I think it's not appropriate to bring up the same issue again and again just like this failed government.
Parliament makes laws (called constitution) that are interpreted by the judiciary if any organ intrudes others territory that will be destructive. Our judiciary should have established some form of continuing education credit system to remember and implement ethics and laws within themselves to stay within constitution. Striking out any part of constitution is breach of constitution by itself but they may recommend to the parliament certain clashes to ponder and amend the law.
Bringing such a law may turn out to be a smart move on part of the government. It must be evident to the government that this law will be challenged by some petitioner and most probably will be struck down by the court. However, this must be seen in the background of two more facts: one, the last contempt law of the country has already lapsed and country is without any such law and two, there is a full court judgement, on the case of the contempt of law, which is reserved and not announced yet. Supreme court will not be able to strike down this law without taking into account the above two factors and that will make the whole case problematic and its earlier use against PM Gillani questionable.
PPP and its Coalition government are legislating majority of laws and amendments to protect and benefit themselves, they have hardly done any legislation for the benefit of people at large.
The honorable Supreme Court Judges seem to have very short memories.The same Judges not very long ago allowed a Dicrtator(General Musharraf) to amend the Constitution as he pleased in 3 years,when all of them had made solemn oaths to preserve,protect and defend the Constitution.Why did they not assert their powers then?