Military courts: Top court wants statements filed in 10 days
Federal and provincial authorities directed to submit reports
Supreme court gives 10 days to file petition against the establishment of the military courts for trying civilians in terrorism-related cases through the 21st constitutional amendment. PHOTO: CREATIVE
ISLAMABAD:
A three-judge bench of the apex court instructed the federal government as well as three provincial governments on Thursday to file their concise statements within 10 days over petitions against the establishment of the military courts for trying civilians in terrorism-related cases through the 21st constitutional amendment.
The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, has given 10 more days to the federal and provincial authorities while hearing 11 constitutional petitions against 21st constitutional amendment.
After submission of the statements, the matter will be referred to the full court for hearing. A full court consists of 17 judges.
Except the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) government, none of the provincial and federal governments have submitted their concise statements over the Lahore High Court Bar Association’s petition.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt requested the bench to give some time for filing the concise statement as certain factual aspects have been highlighted in the petition and later on several other pleas have also been listed on the same subject.
Upon this, the CJ said there are no certain assertions and common grounds were taken up in all petitions, adding that sufficient time has already been given to file the reply in this case.
The bench has also decided to take up a four-year-old 18th constitutional amendment case along with this matter because the same question related to the basic structure is involved in this matter. The notices have been issued to all the petitioners and respondents for fixation of the 18th amendment case on February 24.
The bench has also hinted at examining whether the Constitution has the basic structure or not and if it has then whether the parliament can amend it (basic structure) or not. “Do we have the basic structure or not and if we have then whether these constitutional amendments can be touched by the court or not,” the CJ said in his remarks.
He also pointed out that the 18th amendment case is pending for the last four years and the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) rules have been framed in view of the court’s short order in same matter, adding that the issue came up twice before the commission regarding the amendments in JCP rules but it has been observed that until the short order is not reviewed, there can be no amendments in the JCP rules.
In the 18th amendment case, the procedure laid down for judges’ appointment was challenged but after hearing the case for four months, the top court on October 22, 2010 referred the matter to parliament with certain recommendations. In view of the court’s proposals, the 19th amendment was passed by parliament.
Hamid Khan, counsel for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), however, suggested the bench take up the 18th amendment case separately, because the court’s order has been complied with through the 19th amendment.
The bench, however, told him that the question in the same case is also revolved around the basic structure.
The CJ pointed out that one of the petitioners, Maulvi Iqbal, filed two petitions -- one supporting the establishment of military courts and the other is opposing it.
Asma Jahangir, counsel for the Supreme Court Bar Association, suggested the bench that Iqbal’s petition may be dealt with separately.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 13th, 2015.
A three-judge bench of the apex court instructed the federal government as well as three provincial governments on Thursday to file their concise statements within 10 days over petitions against the establishment of the military courts for trying civilians in terrorism-related cases through the 21st constitutional amendment.
The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, has given 10 more days to the federal and provincial authorities while hearing 11 constitutional petitions against 21st constitutional amendment.
After submission of the statements, the matter will be referred to the full court for hearing. A full court consists of 17 judges.
Except the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) government, none of the provincial and federal governments have submitted their concise statements over the Lahore High Court Bar Association’s petition.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt requested the bench to give some time for filing the concise statement as certain factual aspects have been highlighted in the petition and later on several other pleas have also been listed on the same subject.
Upon this, the CJ said there are no certain assertions and common grounds were taken up in all petitions, adding that sufficient time has already been given to file the reply in this case.
The bench has also decided to take up a four-year-old 18th constitutional amendment case along with this matter because the same question related to the basic structure is involved in this matter. The notices have been issued to all the petitioners and respondents for fixation of the 18th amendment case on February 24.
The bench has also hinted at examining whether the Constitution has the basic structure or not and if it has then whether the parliament can amend it (basic structure) or not. “Do we have the basic structure or not and if we have then whether these constitutional amendments can be touched by the court or not,” the CJ said in his remarks.
He also pointed out that the 18th amendment case is pending for the last four years and the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) rules have been framed in view of the court’s short order in same matter, adding that the issue came up twice before the commission regarding the amendments in JCP rules but it has been observed that until the short order is not reviewed, there can be no amendments in the JCP rules.
In the 18th amendment case, the procedure laid down for judges’ appointment was challenged but after hearing the case for four months, the top court on October 22, 2010 referred the matter to parliament with certain recommendations. In view of the court’s proposals, the 19th amendment was passed by parliament.
Hamid Khan, counsel for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), however, suggested the bench take up the 18th amendment case separately, because the court’s order has been complied with through the 19th amendment.
The bench, however, told him that the question in the same case is also revolved around the basic structure.
The CJ pointed out that one of the petitioners, Maulvi Iqbal, filed two petitions -- one supporting the establishment of military courts and the other is opposing it.
Asma Jahangir, counsel for the Supreme Court Bar Association, suggested the bench that Iqbal’s petition may be dealt with separately.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 13th, 2015.