In a statement issued on Monday, Jahangir said that during her address she had not even mentioned the FSC much less asked for its ‘immediate abolition’ as reported in a section of the press.
She had, however, expressed dismay at the judgment in the Mian Abdur Razzaq Aamir versus The Federal Government. She stressed that by disturbing the framework of the superior judiciary, the FSC had itself advanced the argument for dispensing with parallel judicial systems.
Jahangir said that the FSC had assumed a vast jurisdiction which was previously under the purview of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. She said that through this judgment, the FSC had assumed the appellate jurisdiction in virtually all criminal appeals and in bail cases.
In addition, the judgment indicates that the FSC at some future date could take over the appellate jurisdiction on civil matters like inheritance and family law. The FSC had thus disturbed the judicial framework leaving the High Courts and the Supreme Court with meagre powers while carving an enormously dominant role for itself.
Jahangir said the FSC was a parallel judiciary and could hardly be described as independent. Its judges do not have permanent tenure and are appointed for three years with no age of retirement.
Three out of the eight judges are religious scholars who may have no formal training in law, she added. This, she said, was worrying as most criminal appeals required knowledge of the law.
Jahangir said the judgment would also pose immense hardships for litigants and lawyers as a large number of criminal appeals would be heard at the FSC rather than in High Courts. The judgment, she concluded, had several legal flaws and disregarded previous precedents.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 4th, 2011.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ