The bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, will include Justices Shakirullah Jan, Tasadduq Jilani, Jawwad S Khawaja and Khilji Arif.
The chief justice conducted a preliminary hearing of the cases at the Quetta Registry of the Supreme Court after which notices were issued to the federation, Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, chairman Senate, National Assembly Speaker Fehmida Mirza, Law Minister Farooq H Naek, Attorney General Irfan Qadir and the cabinet division.
At least 13 petitions have been filed against the law that was signed by President Asif Ali Zardari on July 13 in an attempt to grant immunity to all public office holders against contempt of court.
Within a day of its final approval, two petitions were filed in the Supreme Court’s Lahore and Quetta registries challenging it.
COMMENTS (35)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@ syed Ali it is immaterial what country you consider in your arguments the simple truth is that judiciary is perceived to be biased by a vast majority of people by its behavior it is targeting a particular political party by perverting the course of justice by frequent suo motos. In America targeting of a particular party will be totally unacceptable and what law is being enforced by these courts? twent year old case , if the government has broken any laws then those cases should be tried .instead membership of Rahman Malik and other flimsy issues are being considered by the courts at the cast of its normal business a few case of corruption have been pointed out by the courts and in all government systems it is not unusual to find people who do corruption. I will say the will of the people is supreme and they make the constitution and they can change the constitution JUDGES WILL HAVE TO BE APLOITICAL ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE ACCUSED OF CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY
Also Logic Europe, further to my above comment, please just also note that you haven't seem to really understood the "US-based" scenario I created basically as you seemed to be familiar with the US-system. Quoting political agitation against Bhutto and Ayub Khan (not Atul Khan!) in response was inapplicable in such a US-based scenario. I trust this clarifies and helps understanding.
I have also already explained that enforcement of the law (including on the government) and the constitutional limitations of state organs is indeed the "constitutional duty" of the Supreme Court and cannot be wrongly translated into "running the government".
Logic Europe,
You are taken by the deliberate myst created by PPP's narrative i.e. electoral accountability can or somehow be a substitue for legal accountability. Please understand that electoral accountability is no substitute for legal accountability. In other words, just because a government is elected, it does not possess license to break the law during its tenure. If allowed, such practice too would be a violation of the constitution that the courts are under oath to preserve, enforce and defend. A government can rule only according to the law and, if found breaking the law, its the constitutional duty of the judiciary to punish the wrong-doer just like they would punish any Tom, Dick or Harry. So this is the fundamental flaw in your understanding.
For the same reason, your response to my hypothetical US situation is also totally wrong. The US law enforcement and Justice system would never wait for electoral accountability. They would swiftly move to enforce the law! Indeed, so sure are the rulers of those countries of such reaction by the law enforcement and justice system that they resign the moment even the most minor charge of violation is brought against them i.e. they dont wait until the charge is proven against them in a court of law.
Trust this suffices.
@ Syed Ali your first post ;;;; you admit judiciary has made some mistakes, Sir there is no room for mistakes in the highest court of law. Judiciary should punish itself by removing the judges that made mistakes . The reference to the American jurist is anecdotal , the final decision of the court only if it is deemed an honest bonafide impartial interpretation .Where interprations are to satisfy the ego and political agendas of judges ,it will never be allowed in a civilised country ,Such judges will be impeached and prosecuted and thrown out, THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN HAVE BEEN VERY TOLERANT SO FOR. They know the state of the courts and also are aware that these judges legalised the actions of dictators and took oaths under them JUST THINK ABOUT THE FATE OF A JUDGE IN AMERICA IF HE SUPPORTS SUBVERSION OF CONSTITUTION IN PAKISTAN THEY ARE STILL JUDGES ,M ZARDAI SHOULD BE HELD ANSWERABLE FOR REINSTATING THEM In USA a corrupt judge can not survive a day, for your information a judge of the supreme court can be remove by impeachment in America and also if he is Invoved in crimes About PPP imam sorry to hurt your feeling but it is the people's part so people vote it again and again
@syed Ali .in the scenario created by you ,it is the people who will take action either by voting the government out in elections when due or by common rebellion .This happened when masses rose against Bhutoo government and atul khan .Also the people have voted PPP and PMLN out and in many times. So judiciary has no role in running the day to day affairs of a country As you see ,judiciary has virtually taken over the running of government ..Thisnis not their job. MAY I REMIND YOU THAT SWISS BANK CASE IS STILL BEING PERSUED .ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOVED IN CORRUPTION WILL BE CAUGHTBEVENTUALLY ..THE CASES AGAINST PPP LEADERS INDICATE THAT SYSTEM IS WORKING. IT IS NOT WORKING AGAINST SHAREEFS CORRUPTION AS THE CHIEF JUSTICES OWS THEM A DEBT OF GRATITUDE
Also Logic Europe, I would like to ask you a question: what would the US justice system do if they had a government openly indulging in law violations like our present NRO Government e.g. rental power, pak steel, haj corruption, appointing an uneducated guy as head of OGDC? How do you think their FBI, Justice Department, Attorney General's office react? Would they sleep over it? Would the US government dare to transfer or suspend the reacting investigation officers of any of the afore-mentioned US departments?
@Logic Europe:
You have not really explained why my comments "most flimsy". I never said the judiciary has exceed its limits; rather I said it has made some mistakes. So please refer to my relevant post again. In this regard, also note that one of the greatest American jurists once popularly said: the Supreme Court is not final because its infallable; rather its infallable because its final. So the Supreme Court's mistakes are never (including the USA) a sufficient cause for defiance of its orders.
Secondly, I also never said that the Supreme Court is "attacking politicians"; rather I said that it is proactively "checking abuse by ruling politicians i.e. abuse of executive authority". Exercising such checks falls within the Supreme Courts constitutional authority. So please refer to my relevant post again.
As for your US analogy in the end of your post, its firstly misplaced as I have already explained in my previous post that the US legal system has no relevance to Pakistan thats based on the British legal system. Secondly, your analogy is also inaccurate because in the US, a Supreme Court judge, once appointed, cannot be removed - in fact there is not even a retirement age for US Supreme Court judges and they even retire according to their own discretion!
Finally, I note that your post is silent on my statements against the PPP.
I trust this suffices.
@ syed Ali I find your argumentation most flimsy ,you have admitted that judiciary has exceeded its limits ,it is attacking politician and not politics and that it is targeting PPP because it was not keen to restore them in American any JUDICAIARY that shows any bias will be shunt out . A JUDGE HAS NO MANDATE TO BE BIASE PARTIAL OR VINDECTIVE
Contempt of Court would never have been an issue if the Court has gained respect, instead of demanding respect.
If everybody is equal in the eyes of law, why judges are immune from legal proceedings. We want want our right to put on trial all those current and retired judges who have and are harming the country in their own ways
Mirza,
US is a relatively new country in historical terms and therefore also a relatively new democracy. UK is the old democracy and thats the constitutional model closest to us. So quote examples from there, if and when you have to.
Under the Pakistani constitution, constitutional issues are reserved only for the Supreme court to interpret and decide, so the US analogy is anyway and totally inapplicable.
Checking abuse of authority by the ruling executive is a key function of any judiciary - calling such judicial action as "political cases" is tantamount to confusing the issue. They are not political cases; rather they are "cases against ruling politicians" - big difference
A more reasonable objection would be that the SC should also focus on cases against army and PML-N; but then the PPP didn't win any favours by trying its best to avoid restoration of the true SC and instead trying its best to continue a Dogar Court.
Suo moto and proactive approach against executive authority abuse can't justify malafide and black laws so such a black-bill will be deservedly struck down. Supreme Court intervention against abuse of executive authority is there only because we don't have a constitutionally empowered independent NAB like that of the UK, which can fearlessly hunt down reigning executives. Again, the PPP and their likes are not interested in passing such a golden law, so the Supreme Court is the only remaining Pakistani institution who has the constitutional ability and intrinsic will to fill up this vaccum and check the corruption that an IMF-sponsored i.e. insolvent Pakistan can't afford.
The Supreme Court has made some mistakes and continues to make some more but the larger direction is in the interest of Pakistan and I believe things will settle down once a new CJ comes in. So your comments miss the larger picture. The PPP's insistence on not restoring this judiciary was totally selfish and totally against the interest of Pakistan.
There is no point responding to present allegations with past history, which is the style of the PPP and reflects contempt for the intelligence of the Pakistani voter. Outstanding or present cases can only be decided on "relevant" merit.
Trust this suffices and clarifies. Lets be balanced.
@Mirza At which court in Pakistan the new contempt law should be challenged (civil courts/judges). Are we kidding By the time the case will reach supreme court the looters will rule the country for 10-20 years. By the way, US is not the oldest demoracy consult http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historyofdemocracy.
In most civilized democratic countries any new law is first sent to supreme court to get there opinion and find out if there is any fatal flaw. Only in Pakistan things are done my way or highway.
Mirza O Mirza,
This is not a political case for the SC. Its a constitutional matter! Its the Government that has brought a law full of malafide and discrimination. Get ready for the discriminatory and NRO-like, black provisions to be struck down.
I hope SC is ready to throw this biased law into the dustbin and this is the wish of Pakistani nation excluded some stupid Jiaylas.
@Logic Europe: Please look at the court setup in any successful country and you'll find a system of checks and balances in place. Now that the SC is imposing these checks on the parliament we're finally getting to a strong democratic setup. Beside, this law is certainly frivolous and had the parliament been intellectually far-sighted and honest they would have understood its impact on Pakistan's future.
P.S. May common sense also prevail in the heads of the ruling parties as well.
@logic europe...please go through the contempt law before criticizing judiciary and passing sweeping statements. This law will protect every mpa and mna for whatever heinous crimes they may commit. Its such a frivolous law and it doesnt make any sense. And there are precedents elsewhere in the world where supreme courts have struck down laws which are against he basic tenents of the constitution.
The members of the parliament and government are unable to perform their duties if a sword of contempt law keeps hanging over their heads..The way supreme court has been using contempt laws has basically replaced the whole constitution,Even Nawaz shareef is now worries a CPU try can not be run by any government if a supreme court is trying to hound,harass And undermine all their efforts to run the country Nowhere in the world is a court yielding so much power as in Pakistan Alll intellectuals in media are criticising CJ for overstepping it's mark If this new law of struck down then virtually judiciary has taken over the powers of parilament Common sense should prevail
its sad that top institutions of country are clashing. Something good may come out of it. but for now its very disappointing.
Welcome to the new episode of a soap opera. Few notices will be filed, few threats will be issued, few extra newspaper will be sold. At the end poor tax payer will be still waiting for his case heard as the judges will be busy with petion of one sort or the other. President Zardari should expand SCP with additional 13 judges who exclusively hear constitutional cases and suo motto etc and spare few judges to hear cases of joe average Pakistani.
Granting immunity to all public office holder means to open the corruption door. This law is against the constitution which gives equal rights to everyone so this should be abolished and the Law Minister should be reprimanded for his unlawful act.
I wonder how often we waste / lose our hard earned money, respect, position, honor and we dont chaned ourselves gernation after gernations, age and experience does not change or effect our attitude. How we the society members are immune to these things when it works universally? Why? any one to reply please?
@Ghalib: Agree. The indecent haste and intent with which it was passed warrants that it be struck down.
Noora Khusti continues.
Why the bench constitute of same Judges when 12 others are available
@Anoni: instead, CJ thinks' He is Supreme . . . ???
WE expect that sanity will prevail and judiciary will not outrightly annul the new contempt law in order to avert more confrontation, instability in the country.
The Combo candidate displaying the photo of CJ on the election banner failed to win in the by-pole election, against the young Glani. so the PCO SC indirectly helping in a way by taking up cases again & again against the democrat Govt. of PPP.
Justice is what let the people believe in a system. and parliment is one such system. So if the beleive is not there then there is no system. Hence Justice is supreme
Correct Law Minister name, Law Minister Moula Baksh Chandio is former minister now law minister is Farooq H Naik
this law is mala fide and void ab initio.
abolish this discriminatory law