Islamabad:
Although the federal government has not yet formally advanced with the 27th constitutional amendment, the murmurs of discontent and debate have already rooted within the legal fraternity as the Supreme Court resumes the hearings in the revision requests that challenge the order of July 12 in the case of the reserved seats.
The tensions intensified even more when the president of the Islamabad Bar Association (IHCBA), Wajid Gilani, came out in support of the proposed amendment, which hosted it as an opportunity for the “very necessary structural reforms” in the superior judiciary.
However, the Karachi Lawyers Association (KBA) retreated, condemning Gilani’s position and warning that Sindh’s lawyers “would resist strongly, by any necessary means, any attempt to reintroduce the martial law and impose this scheme of a judicial unit in the Pakistan Federation.”
‘Post -constitutional order’
With a weight, former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar said that the original draft of the 26th amendment had already been significantly reviewed under coercion.
“Before the opposition, to disgust from the established order, many of its amendment clauses had to be removed from the final draft. But they were not abandoned as a lost cause,” Khokhar said.
He argued that the current political climate is “conducive” for reintroducing those provisions previously omitted through the 27th amendment.
“The victory on the battlefield can be seductive. The opposition is almost invariably a discouraging task in Pakistan. More than ever before. Even otherwise, controlled institutions lack public legitimacy, legislatures and non -representative executives, the media and legal fraternity are competing for collaboration.”
Khokhar warned that these latent clauses could now return easily, stating that the 26th amendment had already driven Pakistan a “post-constitutional order.”
“The 27th amendment will replace” formally “the rule of law already decreased with the government by law (the law as an instrument of control). Wait the reintroduction of the military courts, a federal constitutional court, the renewed judicial commission, the redefined provincial powers, the decrease of the decreased judicial system, the reduction of the fundamental rights, the marginalization of the constitutional institutions, a provincial system, a provincial system, a provincial system, a provincial system Degree and more, what he says.
“The supreme tragic irony is that the planned victims are, with rare honorable exceptions, accomplices willing and apologists for crimes against constitution and democracy,” Khokhar warned.
Meanwhile, the lawyers have begun to ask themselves why the Constitutional Bench Committee, led by Judge Aminuddin Khan and comprising Judge Jamal Khan Commandkhail and Judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar, has not yet set the hearings on the requests against the 26th amendment to constitute, as he advances rapidly in the case of the reserved seats. It is dedicated to those dedicated to those dedicated to the issues of the issues that are dedicated to those dedicated to the issues of those dedicated to issues. Two thirds of the majority in Parliament.
The observers indicate that the Constitutional Bank seems anxious to conclude the procedures in the case of the reserved seats without delay. However, questions are being asked about whether such has a risk of undermining judicial independence, an outstanding characteristic of the Constitution.
In addition, the same formation of the Constitutional Bank is under scrutiny. A section of the legal community alleges that those who benefited from the 26th amendment doubt their legal challenges.
In 2015, most SC judges, in the historic case of constitutional amendment, had argued that the parliamentary form of government was an outstanding characteristic of the Constitution and could not be amended through the constitutional amendment.
Justice (retd) Sheikh Azmat Saeed created the trial, which was supported by eight judges.
According to the verdict, the Constitution contains a scheme that reflects its outstanding characteristics.
“In an effort to discover such outstanding characteristics, the material outside the Constitution cannot trust safely. The outstanding characteristics can be determined from the Constitution, including democracy, the parliamentary form of government and the independence of the judiciary,” reads the ruling.
In addition, he declared that the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution was subject to implicit limitations. According to articles 238 and 239, the Parliament can amend the Constitution, provided that the outstanding characteristics are not repealed, abrogated or substantially altered.
The sentence also stated that the Apex court has jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution and determine if any constitutional amendment violates its defining characteristics.
While the sentence of the majority remains in force, legal circles argue that there was still a pressing need for the Superior Court to examine the validity of the 26th constitutional amendment.
They warn that a greater delay in the award could open the door to additional constitutional amendments, potentially threatening the fundamental principles of the Constitution.
Meanwhile, in his strongly written statement, the Karachi Lawyers Association expressed his consternation for the public support of the president of IHCBA, Gilani, of an amendment “still unknown to the nation in general.”
“The lawyers and the people of Pakistan expect lawyers and law advice advice to be independent voices. They should not act as representatives on behalf of the Government and be used to throw feelings on behalf of the Government and declare support and constitutional amendments of rubber print that have not yet seen the light of day.”
The KBA argued that making such statements, while the legal community continues to deal with the consequences of the 26th amendment, which has not only been rejected by the legal community in general, but also Sub Judice, was “completely unjustified.”
“If in fact there is any amendment about the Yunque and the Government has considered appropriate to share its content with the president of IHCBA; it should share the same with its real components, which is the legal community.”
“The news is also extending that this amendment will include a fresh oath requirement for the judges of the Superior Court. This is a transparent attempt to intimidate the few judges that remain that their conscience is not yet delivered at the foot of the government. It is identical to the oaths of PCO invented by the general exercise of those who are carried out the same general purpose in this general moment in this general moment. Hameed Dogar, “reads the statement.
“In any case, to the extent that the wise president of IHCBA has announced support for constitutional amendments that would allow the judges of the Superior Court and the lower court of Islamabad to be transferred and published in the different provinces (with or without their consent); the Karachi law association considers this not only a judicial attack against judicial independence, but also an attack against federalism and autonomy and the independence of the judicial trial of the judicial trial of the judicial trial province.
“There is no doubt, Sindh’s lawyers reject and resist, by any necessary means, any attempt to reintroduce martial law and impose this judicial scheme of a unit to the Pakistan Federation,” the association warned.
