If one group stands with parliament, the other voluntarily or under some compulsion is inclined towards the judiciary.
ISLAMABAD: The meaningless debate whether parliament or the judiciary is supreme is going on and on unnecessarily. Though the power of every organ of state is clearly defined in the Constitution, yet both our lawmakers and those whose job it is to interpret the law, appear to have entangled themselves into a monotonous war of words. If one group stands with parliament, the other voluntarily or under some compulsion is inclined towards the judiciary.
It is an undeniable fact that parliament, being the maker of the Constitution itself and formulator of laws, is supreme, but its powers to legislate laws are not unbridled and are in fact subject to judicial scrutiny. Hence, the supremacy of parliament is subservient to the Constitution.
The judiciary, for its part, is empowered by the Constitution to interpret and strike down any law that conflicts with any constitutional provision. This it has to do while remaining within the boundaries fixed by the Constitution. Having said that, the insistence by lawmakers that parliament is supreme and judiciary’s counter-insistence that it is supreme do not augur well for the country’s future. It may not be out of place to mention here that while parliament does have the right to legislate, often this is done in great haste and without any debate.
By the same token, while one cannot question the power of the judiciary to interpret the Constitution, sometimes the directions given by the Supreme Court to the executive, to, say, appoint such and such official or effect a transfer doesn’t seem to fall within purview of the interpretation of the Constitution. Rather, it seems to be a case where the judiciary does seem to be interfering in the duties of the executive, and that, too, is not good for democracy.
Raja Shafaatullah
Published in The Express Tribune, August 12th, 2012.
