Top law officer told to justify amendment
Petitioner says NAB Amendment Ordinance was promulgated without prime minister’s advice.
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday directed the attorney general to submit a comprehensive but concise written report explaining the constitutional justification for issuing the NAB Amendment Ordinance along with the record of dates of consultations with the prime minister.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Tassaduq Jillani issued the direction while hearing two identical petitions challenging the ordinance.
AG Maulvi Anwar-ul-Haq submitted that because he returned from abroad a day earlier he could not prepare his formulations, therefore the court grant him some time.
The court granted him time with directions to submit a comprehensive but concise report explaining the constitutional justification for issuing the NAB amendment ordinance and record of consultation with the prime minister on the next date of hearing – November 1.
Advocate Zafar Ali Shah of the Nawaz League requested the court to ask the government when the ordinance was sent to the Printing Corporation of Pakistan (PCP). On this Justice Gillani remarked that the written statement would summarise everything.
In the last hearing, Advocate Shah had contended that the president’s powers to promulgate an ordinance under Article 89 of the constitution were misused and the ordinance No XVIII/2010 showing the print-line as “Islamabad, Thursday, September 16, 2010” by the respondent manager Printing Corporation of Pakistan was just against the fact and contrary to the law.
He said the ordinance was promulgated without an advice from the prime minister and that powers assumed to transfer cases from accountability courts was against spirit of the constitution.
In his petition, Advocate Shah had stated that on October 1 the said ordinance was part of the order of the day for laying before the Senate by the law minister.
He said he had raised objection during the Senate proceedings over the issue. And later, the whole opposition, led by its leader Wasim Sajjad, staged a walkout from the hall in protest.
On the same day, the prime minister had also made a statement on the floor of the House, saying that he had not given any advice for the ordinance.
He said the ordinance was neither promulgated on the advice of the prime minister nor was it signed and promulgated by the president on September 16.
Advocate Shah said the respondent federation through the ministry of law and justice had violated the constitution. Moreover, the amended ordinance was promulgated at a time when the government and the opposition were working to introduce a new accountability law, he added.
He pleaded with the court to declare the amended ordinance void ab initio and ultra vires of the constitution.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2010.
The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday directed the attorney general to submit a comprehensive but concise written report explaining the constitutional justification for issuing the NAB Amendment Ordinance along with the record of dates of consultations with the prime minister.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Tassaduq Jillani issued the direction while hearing two identical petitions challenging the ordinance.
AG Maulvi Anwar-ul-Haq submitted that because he returned from abroad a day earlier he could not prepare his formulations, therefore the court grant him some time.
The court granted him time with directions to submit a comprehensive but concise report explaining the constitutional justification for issuing the NAB amendment ordinance and record of consultation with the prime minister on the next date of hearing – November 1.
Advocate Zafar Ali Shah of the Nawaz League requested the court to ask the government when the ordinance was sent to the Printing Corporation of Pakistan (PCP). On this Justice Gillani remarked that the written statement would summarise everything.
In the last hearing, Advocate Shah had contended that the president’s powers to promulgate an ordinance under Article 89 of the constitution were misused and the ordinance No XVIII/2010 showing the print-line as “Islamabad, Thursday, September 16, 2010” by the respondent manager Printing Corporation of Pakistan was just against the fact and contrary to the law.
He said the ordinance was promulgated without an advice from the prime minister and that powers assumed to transfer cases from accountability courts was against spirit of the constitution.
In his petition, Advocate Shah had stated that on October 1 the said ordinance was part of the order of the day for laying before the Senate by the law minister.
He said he had raised objection during the Senate proceedings over the issue. And later, the whole opposition, led by its leader Wasim Sajjad, staged a walkout from the hall in protest.
On the same day, the prime minister had also made a statement on the floor of the House, saying that he had not given any advice for the ordinance.
He said the ordinance was neither promulgated on the advice of the prime minister nor was it signed and promulgated by the president on September 16.
Advocate Shah said the respondent federation through the ministry of law and justice had violated the constitution. Moreover, the amended ordinance was promulgated at a time when the government and the opposition were working to introduce a new accountability law, he added.
He pleaded with the court to declare the amended ordinance void ab initio and ultra vires of the constitution.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 27th, 2010.