SC asks who will keep a check on judiciary if it oversteps jurisdiction
Asks about procedure if basic structure of the Constitution were to be altered
PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
Hearing the 18th and 21st constitutional amendment case, judges of the apex court raised many questions including one asking who will keep a check on judiciary if it oversteps its jurisdiction.
Resuming hearing of the case on Tuesday, a member of the 17-judge bench of the Supreme Court Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said: “We do not allow any institution to overstep its jurisdiction but who reviews us if we overstep [our jurisdiction].”
Taking part in the discourse, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar asked if “we (judges) are infallible”. He also referred Article 209 and asked whether judges had not done anything wrong.
The head of the bench, Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, said parliament has no power to amend the basic structure of the Constitution. “But if there emerges a situation to amend the basic structure then what procedure will be adopted?” he asked.
Abdul Hafiz Pirzada, who has challenged the 18th amendment on his own behalf, said the prime minister should dissolve the assembly and seek fresh mandate for the purpose of amending the basic structure.
“So you are saying that the only way to dissolve an assembly is through the PM,” the chief justice asked. The court then inquired how parliament would decide whether it could do a certain amendment by itself or would have to revert to the electorate.
Justice Saqib asked as to how parliament would find out what is the basic structure of the Constitution. Pirzada replied that it was the duty of the judiciary to elaborate the basic structure.
Justice Khosa observed that in the past different methods, including referendum, were adopted to amend the Constitution.
“But now in an all parties conference 30 persons representing different parties sit together and they suppose they are representing the will of the people and they decide for the whole populace,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 3rd, 2015.
Hearing the 18th and 21st constitutional amendment case, judges of the apex court raised many questions including one asking who will keep a check on judiciary if it oversteps its jurisdiction.
Resuming hearing of the case on Tuesday, a member of the 17-judge bench of the Supreme Court Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said: “We do not allow any institution to overstep its jurisdiction but who reviews us if we overstep [our jurisdiction].”
Taking part in the discourse, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar asked if “we (judges) are infallible”. He also referred Article 209 and asked whether judges had not done anything wrong.
The head of the bench, Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, said parliament has no power to amend the basic structure of the Constitution. “But if there emerges a situation to amend the basic structure then what procedure will be adopted?” he asked.
Abdul Hafiz Pirzada, who has challenged the 18th amendment on his own behalf, said the prime minister should dissolve the assembly and seek fresh mandate for the purpose of amending the basic structure.
“So you are saying that the only way to dissolve an assembly is through the PM,” the chief justice asked. The court then inquired how parliament would decide whether it could do a certain amendment by itself or would have to revert to the electorate.
Justice Saqib asked as to how parliament would find out what is the basic structure of the Constitution. Pirzada replied that it was the duty of the judiciary to elaborate the basic structure.
Justice Khosa observed that in the past different methods, including referendum, were adopted to amend the Constitution.
“But now in an all parties conference 30 persons representing different parties sit together and they suppose they are representing the will of the people and they decide for the whole populace,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 3rd, 2015.