Latest news with #26thamendment
Express Tribune
02-08-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Opposition huddle
Listen to article There is a twinkle of hope for the opposition as it, at least, managed to gather under an umbrella and call out the government for its extra-constitutional actions. The assembling of the opposition conglomerate, nonetheless, was a telling tale of hide and seek, as the local administration in the federal capital went on a witch-hunt. This reflected the political intolerance that is now well-embedded within the ruling collation as it apparently believes in exterminating the dissent voices, and going solo in contravention of the essentials of a participatory democracy. The fact that the opposition alliance Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-i-Ayeen-i-Pakistan (TTAP) was able to come out with a strong narrative, after a long hiatus, and called for a grand dialogue and a new charter of democracy is a welcome sign. It should pave the way for reconciliation. The coalition of six opposition parties, of which the PTI is a component, was categorical in demanding an end to what they described as a "wave of fascism and political manipulation" in the country. It also offered its 'blanket support' for all anti-government protests, calling upon the authorities to release all political prisoners, including Imran Khan and Baloch dissidents. The opposition is now unanimous in calling for supremacy of the Constitution and Parliament, rule of law, independence of the judiciary, appointment of an independent Election Commission and fair elections. Likewise, setting up of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission was underscored to address in de jure terms the excesses that have been committed against the people, so that a new congenial order could emerge in the country. The call for repealing the 26th amendment and reforming the judiciary was at the bastion, as the alliance insisted that the fundamental spirit of the Constitution and distribution of powers among the organs of the state stood shattered, leading to erosion of public trust in the system. This definitely necessitates a grand dialogue, and the government would be well advised to lend an attentive ear, rather than scoffing at it in a knee-jerk reaction.
Express Tribune
29-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
PTI's unending woes
Listen to article The PTI's woes seem to be unending, as well as the government's policy to push it to the wall. The swift manner in which the Election Commission disqualified three party legislators, on the premise of their convictions by the anti-terrorism courts over May 9 vandalism testifies the intolerance that institutions have bred towards the opposition. The cases are subject to appeal and the breakneck speed was unwarranted. It is a foregone conclusion that former PM Imran Khan and his stalwarts, who are standing with him, are subject to blatant victimisation and this does not bode well for political stability and social coherence of society. Lawful efforts on the part of the PTI to seek relief from the courts have often hit snags. It is also an undeniable fact that all public litigation cases of high profile interest, especially those pertaining to the 2024 general election and the 26th amendment, are lingering and yet to see the light of the day. The hurried adjournment of Imran Khan's bail pleas in eight May 9 cases until August 12, by a two-member bench of the apex court yesterday, has sent the wrong signals at a time when the party is gearing up for a nationwide protest movement. The continued denial of relief to PTI founder and other imprisoned workers, and the tendency of slapping more cases amid a witch-hunt of its supporters, is in need of being reviewed. This policy has led to nowhere and repeatedly failed the initiatives of brokering a dialogue between the PTI and the government, compelling the aggrieved party to raise the stakes by demanding talks only with the security establishment. With terrorism, economic downslide and a regional revulsion knocking on its doors, the country cannot afford to be groped down in chaos and instability. Lifting the lid of oppression from the PTI and releasing imprisoned workers, including Khan, will be in national interest, and this would pave the way for a constructive dialogue. The courts are poised with a responsibility to go by the book and let justice be seen to be done.
Express Tribune
21-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
IHC startscontempt case against PM, cabinet
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has initiated contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his entire cabinet for disregarding its order to provide reasons for not assisting a US court hearing the case of incarcerated neuroscientist Dr Aafia Siddiqui. "As the government has not reverted with the reasons despite being directed to do so, it is in contempt, leaving me with no option but to issue a notice of contempt to the Federal Government. "Office is directed to initiate a contempt petition accordingly, in which all the members of the Federal Government will be respondents. The replies of all the ministers, including the prime minister, shall be filed within two weeks from today," said a three-page order authored by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan. The judge noted that in his last order he had given the government time to revert with its decision, while cautioning the state law officer that inaction would result in contempt proceedings. The federal government on July 15 approached the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the May 16, 2025, order of the IHC that allowed amendments to a previously settled petition concerning Dr Aafia Siddiqui - nearly a decade after its filing. The SC, however, has not yet listed the petition for hearing. Justice Ejaz Ishaq Khan was to go on summer vacation from Monday (July 21). However, he had announced at the last hearing that he would hear the case on July 21. Interestingly, the IHC did not list the case for hearing before his bench. The judge, nevertheless, heard the case on Monday and later issued a blistering order, criticizing IHC Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and the entire "demolition squad catapulted into" the IHC after the 26th amendment. Justice Khan noted that the leave schedule was announced much earlier to the date on which he had ordered to list this case today, given its importance and the need for swift dispensation of justice "On Thursday or perhaps Friday, I was informed through my PS [personal secretary] by the office that the cause list will not be issued unless the roster of the sitting judges for this week was amended with the leave of the chief justice. "That seemed to me a trivial matter and I asked my PS to move an application accordingly. I was informed on Saturday that the application was duly moved but the file remained on the table of the Chief Justice, who did not find even 30 seconds to sign it. "Whether that was by design or oversight, I cannot say for sure, but given the manner in which the roster of judges has been used as a tool for the desired outcome in specific cases, and given the government's stiff opposition to do what is right and to stand by the daughter of the nation at the critical juncture of the motion before a US Court, I may be forgiven for thinking that it was the former." He said the government filed an appeal before the Supreme Court against his earlier decision permitting amendments to the petition for continuation of this case but the SC did not take up the case. "[So] the machinations of the executive appeared elsewhere, in the form of controlling the proceedings of this court through its roster. "The legal historians would write that now, even if he wishes to by reason of imperatives of urgent justice, a judge is now not allowed to hold court by the high court establishment when he is on leave." He stated that the correct legal position is that the office cannot use the shoulder of the CJ in the exercise of administrative powers to obstruct judicial proceedings ordered by a judge. He said the motivation of a judge to hold court on a day on which he is officially' on leave would spell out whether the reason to hold court was any ulterior motive or the dispensation of justice. "I trust that all right thinking men and women would agree with me that today my decision to hold court was solely and exclusively for the purposes of dispensation of justice. He said gone were the days when a judge could pass an order even while playing golf or dining with his family, if the exigency so required. The ceremony of robes and a courtroom – or the menial triviality of a cause list as in this case were never the indispensable prerequisites for him to carry out judicial business. "This is yet another instance of the reproachable use of the administrative power to shackle the exercise of independent judicial authority, with the likely motivation to pend (until my leave ends) the government's response with reasons as to why it would not sign the amicus brief. "However, the imperatives of justice shall not be defeated by such petty means. To the extent I can, I will exercise my judicial authority to the end of upholding the dignity of the High Court and the justice it dispenses," he added. The bench will resume hearing the case on September 1.
Express Tribune
12-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Time for judicial assertiveness
Listen to article It's late but never too late. The decision from a statutory judicial body to uphold its independence and not to sway into executive pressure is most welcome. That is how justice must be seen to be done, especially at a time when the chips are down and courts and judicial officers are in a crisscrossing position after the 26th amendment that had come to negate its vibrancy and constitutional assertiveness. The National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee (NJPMC), in its 53rd meeting, resolved to devise a mechanism to report, investigate and resolve irritants that come to hinder the smooth sailing of judicial process. This is where the judiciary has lacked and the piling of cases, as well as maneuvering from other organs of the state, had cast it in a bad light. The fact that the superior body with the CJP in the chair brought to the fore the enigma of enforced disappearances was on the spot. This issue has been a constant annoyance for long as the courts found themselves perplexed and unable to assert their dictum. The plain-talking, thus, from Lords that the judiciary would not compromise on its constitutional duty to safeguard human rights must walk the talk, and visible change on the spectrum must be evident in their performance, decisions and implementation. The body's determination, likewise, to upgrade the system on modern lines by introducing technology; ensure a citizen-centric justice delivery; and institute a Commercial Litigation Corridor with special benches could not have been delayed any further. The judiciary for quite some time has been under the spotlight and the political upheavals have tested its independence. There are dozens of public interest litigations that have failed to see the light of the day, including those on the 2024 general elections, the civil-military tangle and the bulldozed legislations. It is incumbent upon the august courts to take a stance under the dictates of the Constitution and deliver justice, unmindful of their socio-political ramifications.
Express Tribune
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Clipping powers
It seems the executive's onslaught on the judiciary is unending. But the dilemma is that the Lords of the apex court are in it too, having willingly conceded their constitutionally-guaranteed powers and privileges. The Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act, 2023 is a case in point which has literally come to torpedo the functioning of the top court, as well as the powers in the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Moreover, the 26th amendment has already decimated the vibrancy of the courts, and the phenomenon of 'court packing' has undermined the spirit of separation of powers in the organs of the state and the independence of judiciary. To add to this is the committee formed under the Practice and Procedure Act, 2023, with a new notification to circumvent further the powers rested with the Chief Justice. The fact that now a three-member body will manage the affairs of the top judge in his absence, as illustrated exclusively under Clause-5, and that the decision to constitute benches shall not rest with him either has made the high office ineffective. This decision lies in conflict with Article 180 of the Constitution. It is also noticeable that the suo motu powers wrested in the office of the Chief Justice were earlier clipped, apparently on concerns of judicial activism by independent-minded senior judges, rendering a death blow to the court's utility and the confidence of the masses in the judicial system. The Clause-5 is in need of being scrutinised by the judiciary at large. It does not come to impact a phase of time for reasons of exigency, but an entire modus operandi of lawful independence, prestige of the superior courts and supremacy of the Constitution. It is regrettable that the puisne judge, who was looked up in awe, is now part and parcel of the tweaks being introduced in the court proceedings - something that warrants some explanation. Restoring the original dictum of the Constitution in judicial relevance is indispensable, and all such measures undertaken on assumptions must stand rescinded.
