Pakistan

SC can keep check on state organs: CJ

The CJ said that under the constitution the judiciary can intervene if any of the state organ crosses its limits.

Qaiser Zulfiqar September 15, 2010

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Iftikhar Muh-ammad Chaudhry has said that under the Constitution the judiciary has the right to intervene if any of the state organ crosses its limits.

Speaking at the opening ceremony of the new judicial year here on Tuesday, Justice Chaudhry said the government is not happy with some of the decisions of the Supreme Court. However, the august court gives its verdicts according to the Constitution and law and such decisions would continue to be announced in the future.

The chief justice said that since its restoration the judiciary has handed down landmark decisions, with the verdict of July 31 against the PCO judges figuring prominently. Judges of the higher judiciary are determined to uproot corruption from the lower courts. However, complaints are still being received about corruption in the courts at the district level, the CJP said, adding, “We were hopeful that after raise in the salary of judges and the staff this evil would vanish but unfortunately it has not”.

Justice Chaudhry said that the judiciary respects the democratic institutions as well as the elected representatives. The judges are carefully intervening in other organs of the state while dealing with them. However, the court would announce its verdicts according to the Constitution and law in case someone approaches the court.

Pakistan is a democratic country where the parliamentary system is in place. Under this system the supremacy of Constitution and the rule of law is the real merit, the chief justice said. “Our system ensures the basic rights, governance of the law and independence of the media.” The job of parliament is to ascertain the legislation and the performance of executive.

However the present parliament is astounding that it did not ratify the steps of November 3, 2007, the CJP said.

He added that it is the responsibility of the Supreme Court as the guardian of the Constitution to ensure that all other state organs keep functioning smoothly within their domains.

While presenting the performance report of last year, the CJP said that the Supreme Court disposed of 40,000 suo motu cases whereas the SC is hearing a historic case of 18th amendment for the last three months.

Attorney General Maulvi Anwar-ul-Haq, Supreme Court Bar Association president Qazi Anwar and Pakistan Bar Council chairman Nasrullah Warraich also spoke on the occasion.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 15^th, 2010.

COMMENTS (15)

mussarat | 14 years ago | Reply I think we are still undecided as to which institution should ,be omnipotent in Pakistan. army, judiciary, or the Parliament. In my opinion neither of them except army has been most powerful "organ" in Pakistan that supports every crumbling institution. If judiciary takes notice of wrong doing notice within the parliament, judiciary will definitely " requiest" the army to execute orders. So, be very clear the most powerful organ is the army. Mussarat Washington DC

shahid ali | 14 years ago | Reply It is being appriciated that Supreme Court role in the state as so many suo moto action have been taken and it is also being taken action on many disputed matters of the state by supreme court. It is right to say that corruption has not been uprooted completely in the under courts and system is being worked as on before but we hope it to be vanished very soon by supreme Court. It is reightly said by Chief Justic the democratic institutions should be function under the constitution and not be crossed its limit.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Nasir | 14 years ago | Reply Correction: Yes, I mean May 12, 2007. Thanks SA for correcting me. Hundreds of thousands of cases are in the courts for years. Ordinary people continue suffering. Go to any lower or higher level court anywhere in the country. People keep waiting for hearing of their cases, and by the mid day they get a new date for the hearing. Our top level judiciary is extremely politicized. Every day one will find statements of judges on front pages of news papers. In most of the cases top stories of news papers are about statements of judges. They are very good in giving controversial remarks during hearing of different cases. I remember the LHC chief justice Khwaja Sharif once telling a gathering of lawyers that "everybody knows the killers of Benazir Bhutto." I am sure Mr Sharif will also know. Can he please take some action against those killers, summon them to his court or at least reveal their names.

Sultan Ahmed. | 14 years ago | Reply Switzerland money laundering? Qurz auaro mulk sawaro,????????????

Yousaf | 14 years ago | Reply Now Parliment has to take this right back from the Judiciary.... Also, please let us know if Judiciary has done something valueable after its restoration and abolition of our Economy.

User | 14 years ago | Reply Mr. Chief Justics said right to enlightening on constitution functioning and warnning to the organ of the state that they should be in limit to perform their duties and to be fuly devoted to the state.

KM | 14 years ago | Reply Mr. CJ, its time for action and NOT just talk. We need results now in the form of justice and taking the culprit to task. We dont prisoners sulking for years to be hanged, we want to see you perform on every street corner of Pakistan, and only will this nation straighten up. Yes it is your right to overlook the state in the capacity that things are not going beyond the constitution, but we are sick of this rosy talk. We want the bad lawyers, and politicians to be dealt in a similar manner as any commoner is.

shahzad khan | 14 years ago | Reply SC can keep check on each & everything but no one can keep a check on them when unconstitutional Judgements are passed. Judges are asked to continue work on a Stay order which has no legal/constitutional backing. When they take oath on PCO (1999) its legal & justified but when they are not given oath (2007) then that PCO is declared Haram. Now its time for the Nation to think themselves on these realities rather than following some Nawaz funded media elements.

Fahim | 14 years ago | Reply CJP, where were you when LHC chief justice remarked publically about Pakistans People Party government in Punjab province and said he has a good relations with Sharif Brothers. Why are you not intervening here???People have no more faith on judiciary as it has bring nothing except chaos and well said by Maz the only beneficiary of the independent judiciary so far are the Sharif brothers.

Maz | 14 years ago | Reply I dont believe in him any more Mushraff did the right thing in sacking him,sooner or later you all will understand and regret for supporting him.He is just words and nothing in matter,still the sialkot lynching saga nothing as happnd.People have already forgotten.I feel sorry for my beloved country who have such rulers:(

SA | 14 years ago | Reply Nasir do you mean May 12 , 2007?

Asmatullah | 14 years ago | Reply Honorable CJP we have not seen any positive happeining under the independent judiciary. With due apology the only beneficiary of the independent judiciary so far are the Sharif brothers.

Nasir | 14 years ago | Reply Does that mean the chief justice is going to annul some of the 18th amendment clauses? He wants himself to be the supreme commander of the country? Keeping everybody and every organ under his command? Dear chief. You are so good in taking sou moto actions. Could you please take one such action on the killings of almost 50 innocent people who came on the streets of Karachi on May 28 to support you. Its never too late. After all the judiciary is INDEPENDENT.

ArifQ | 14 years ago | Reply Dear CJP, who will intervene when honorable judges cross their limits? Evidently, the Supreme court sees itslef as the Judge, jury and Executive.

Asmat Jamal | 14 years ago | Reply Chief Justice Iftikhar Muh-ammad Chaudhry has said that under the Constitution the judiciary has the right to intervene if any of the state organ crosses its limits. So far so good. For purpose of academic discussion, who is responsible to see that Judiciary works inside it limits?

Replying to X