21st constitutional amendment challenged in SC
Lawyers' bodies weighing options to challenge the constitutional amendment
The petitioner alleged that under the 21st amendment federal government has curtailed the power and jurisdiction of the apex court, which is in violation of Articles 2A, 9, 10, 14, 25, 175, 185, 189, 201, 203 and 204 of the constitution. PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
A day after the 21st amendment was passed by the two-third majority in the Parliament, it was challenged in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
Maulvi Iqbal Haider and Shahid Orakzai filed a petition in the apex court under Article 184(3) of the constitution, requesting the top court to provide guidelines and interpret Articles 2A, 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 70(4), 175, 185, 190, 201, 203, 204 of the Constitution after the passage of 21s constitutional amendment as well as Pakistan Army (amendment) Act 2015.
Haider in his petition contended that as per the amendments, the military courts would not function under the supervision of the high courts or Supreme Court, which is against the basic structure of the Constitution, therefore, the court should take judicial notice in the larger interest of supremacy of the Constitution.
They further submitted that, under the Constitution every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice and propagate their religion and every religious denomination and every sect thereof shall have the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions. However, they contended that the latest amendment included the name of organisations using the name of religion or sect, instead of militancy. They termed the amendment a disgrace and an attempt to defame religion, sect, which is against the ideology of Pakistan.
Further, the petitioners argued that military courts should work under the supervision of superior courts as the right of appeal should be provided before the Supreme Court and the name of religion or sect should be avoided because terrorists/militants have no religion or sect.
“The attack on army public school in Peshawar is a great failure of both Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and federal government but the government shows that there is failure of the judiciary of Pakistan,” the petitioner said.
He alleged that the federal government has curtailed the power and jurisdiction of the apex court, which is in violation of Articles 2A, 9, 10, 14, 25, 175, 185, 189, 201, 203 and 204 of the constitution.
Similarly, the top court’s judgment against the establishment of military courts cannot be superseded and override through a constitutional amendment, he added.
The petitioner raised the question that whether the new constitutional amendment affects the independence of judiciary and freedom to profess of religion. He further asked whether Parliament has the authority to override the judgment of the superior courts of Pakistan.
While filing the petition, Orakzai requested the court to take notice that the bill to amend the military law could not even be considered by the Parliament until the President has given his assent.
Lawyers' bodies weighing options to challenge 21st amendment
Meanwhile, Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) will hold a grand convention of lawyers’ representatives Thursday to decide about plan of action against 21st constitutional amendment.
While talking to The Express Tribune, LHCBA president Shafqat Chohan said they will decide on Thursday whether 21st constitutional amendment should be challenged in the apex court or not.
However, he admitted that LHCBA would likely challenge the 21st constitutional amendment. It is also learnt that Hamid Khan will appear on behalf of LHCBA in this case
President Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Fazl-i- Haq Abbasi said that though the bar opposes the 21st constitutional amendment but they have not yet decide about challenging it, adding that SCBA and Pakistan Bar Council will soon convene a special meeting to devise the future line of action against the constitutional amendment.
A day after the 21st amendment was passed by the two-third majority in the Parliament, it was challenged in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
Maulvi Iqbal Haider and Shahid Orakzai filed a petition in the apex court under Article 184(3) of the constitution, requesting the top court to provide guidelines and interpret Articles 2A, 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 70(4), 175, 185, 190, 201, 203, 204 of the Constitution after the passage of 21s constitutional amendment as well as Pakistan Army (amendment) Act 2015.
Haider in his petition contended that as per the amendments, the military courts would not function under the supervision of the high courts or Supreme Court, which is against the basic structure of the Constitution, therefore, the court should take judicial notice in the larger interest of supremacy of the Constitution.
They further submitted that, under the Constitution every citizen shall have the right to profess, practice and propagate their religion and every religious denomination and every sect thereof shall have the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions. However, they contended that the latest amendment included the name of organisations using the name of religion or sect, instead of militancy. They termed the amendment a disgrace and an attempt to defame religion, sect, which is against the ideology of Pakistan.
Further, the petitioners argued that military courts should work under the supervision of superior courts as the right of appeal should be provided before the Supreme Court and the name of religion or sect should be avoided because terrorists/militants have no religion or sect.
“The attack on army public school in Peshawar is a great failure of both Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and federal government but the government shows that there is failure of the judiciary of Pakistan,” the petitioner said.
He alleged that the federal government has curtailed the power and jurisdiction of the apex court, which is in violation of Articles 2A, 9, 10, 14, 25, 175, 185, 189, 201, 203 and 204 of the constitution.
Similarly, the top court’s judgment against the establishment of military courts cannot be superseded and override through a constitutional amendment, he added.
The petitioner raised the question that whether the new constitutional amendment affects the independence of judiciary and freedom to profess of religion. He further asked whether Parliament has the authority to override the judgment of the superior courts of Pakistan.
While filing the petition, Orakzai requested the court to take notice that the bill to amend the military law could not even be considered by the Parliament until the President has given his assent.
Lawyers' bodies weighing options to challenge 21st amendment
Meanwhile, Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) will hold a grand convention of lawyers’ representatives Thursday to decide about plan of action against 21st constitutional amendment.
While talking to The Express Tribune, LHCBA president Shafqat Chohan said they will decide on Thursday whether 21st constitutional amendment should be challenged in the apex court or not.
However, he admitted that LHCBA would likely challenge the 21st constitutional amendment. It is also learnt that Hamid Khan will appear on behalf of LHCBA in this case
President Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Fazl-i- Haq Abbasi said that though the bar opposes the 21st constitutional amendment but they have not yet decide about challenging it, adding that SCBA and Pakistan Bar Council will soon convene a special meeting to devise the future line of action against the constitutional amendment.