The Supreme Court censured on Thursday Balochistan’s ‘political hierarchy’ for its efforts to remove Chief Secretary Babar Yaqoob from his post for following court orders.
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, was hearing the Balochistan law and order case on Thursday.
“Instead of taking stringent measures, the executives of the provinces are wasting their energy on removing an honest, committed and upright officer who is implementing the court’s orders and following the rule of law,” the chief justice said, while pointing out the provincial authorities’ failure to recover missing persons and control incidents of sectarian violence.
“We know that [Yaqoob] is an honest and upright officer and every department in Islamabad or Punjab would be happy to get his services, but our objective to retain him in Balochistan is to improve the deteriorating law and order situation,” he added.
He pointed out that the chief secretary is the one who implemented the court’s directives and resisted illegal orders, which is why “he is being humiliated by provincial authorities.”
The Balochistan government’s counsel Shahid Hamid, however, was quick to deny that the government was making any efforts to remove Yaqoob.
During the proceedings, the chief justice further stated that people are being killed as a result of sectarian violence on a daily basis, yet not a single person has been arrested so far. He added that the issue is of political nature and thus should have a political solution.
Responding to this, Advocate Hamid said that following the 18th Amendment, assemblies can only be dissolved through a no confidence motion. The other option, he added, is to hold elections after the completion of the present tenure, since members of the provincial assembly recently renewed their confidence in the chief minister and there was no other way to remove him.
Justice Gulzar, however, stated that the court was not interested in removing or dissolving any assembly, and only desired a political solution of the current situation. The chief justice concurred, saying that the 58(2) B was not a good option.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 21st, 2012.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ