Latest news with #MiangulHassanAurangzeb
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Corporate legal framework: SECP, FJA hold first-of-its-kind training for Banking Court Judges
ISLAMABAD: The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP), in collaboration with the Federal Judicial Academy (FJA), conducted first-of-its-kind training programme for Banking Court Judges on Pakistan's corporate legal framework. This three-day training, held at FJA from June 2–4, 2025, marked a milestone in judicial capacity building and regulatory-jurisdictional alignment. The participating judges are officially notified to preside over prosecutions initiated by SECP. This can include cases involving white-collar crime, financial fraud, regulatory violations, and offences under laws such as the Companies Act, 2017 and the Securities Act, 2015. The practical and in-depth training was delivered by SECP Commissioners, Executive Directors, and senior subject-matter experts. Sessions covered a wide spectrum of topics, from company registration, licensing regimes, and financial reporting, to capital market offences, investigative powers, and emerging regulatory challenges. The FJA has been instrumental in facilitating and curating the training to ensure it meets the judiciary's evolving professional needs. The programme culminated with a certificate distribution ceremony, with Honourable Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, as Chief Guest. This pioneering initiative underscores SECP's commitment to supporting judicial excellence and effective prosecution. It also sets the stage for a more informed, collaborative, and agile enforcement ecosystem — where regulators and courts work in tandem to uphold the law in an increasingly sophisticated financial environment. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Section 30 of 1940 Act: SC explains court's jurisdictional extent
ISLAMABAD: The arbitration is an autonomous and final forum, and judicial interference is permissible only in narrow and clearly defined circumstances envisaged by Section 30 of the 1940 Act; i.e., jurisdictional error, proven misconduct, or a patent legal mistake visible on the face of the record. A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi and comprising Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, rendered this verdict on Pakistan Railways' petition against Lahore High Court (LHC) judgment dated 04.03.2024. The disputes between the petitioner (Pakistan Railways) and the respondent (CRRC Ziyang Co Limited) arose from a contract executed on 01.11.2017 were referred to arbitration by a two-member arbitral tribunal, which rendered the award on 02.07.2021 and filed it before the civil court. The petitioner on 01.09.2021 filed objections to the said award praying for the award to be set aside and the disputes to be remitted back to the arbitrators. The civil court on 23.11.2022 under amended provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, framed the issues requiring the parties to submit the list of witnesses for the production of evidence within a period of seven days. The respondent under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, assailed the civil court's order dated 23-11-2022 before the LHC, which on 04-03-2024 set aside the said order and remanded the case to the civil court for a decision afresh on the basis of available record. The petitioner approached the apex court against the LHC verdict. The nine-page judgment authored by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, upholding the LHC order, dismissed the petition. It said objections to arbitration awards, ought to avoid framing issues and record evidence unless absolutely necessary. 'The framing of issues and recording of evidence; however, undermines the core objectives of the 1940 Act, which are efficiency, finality, and minimal judicial intervention.' The judgment noted that arbitration offers several time-related advantages compared to traditional court litigation. Arbitration typically takes less time because the process is more streamlined, with fewer procedural steps and less formality than court proceedings. Justice Hassan wrote that the Courts are expected to pronounce judgment and decree in terms of the award, intervening only on narrow grounds such as misconduct or invalidity of the award, without re-opening factual issues through evidence recording. It is now well settled that arbitrators are entitled to regulate their own procedure and are not governed by the strict procedure prescribed by the CPC and the rules regarding evidence contained in the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. Arbitrators decide disputes based on evidence presented during arbitration proceedings. They are under no obligation to frame issues as provided in the CPC. The judgment said that courts recording fresh evidence disregard the procedural safeguards in arbitration, such as the Arbitrator's exclusive jurisdiction to assess evidence and apply law. This may lead to inconsistent outcomes and procedural unfairness. If the court frames issues and records evidence after objections to an award are filed, parties may use this as an opportunity to re-litigate the entire dispute, leading to multiple proceedings on the same issues besides undermining both the legislative intent and the integrity of the arbitral process. The framing of issues, recording of evidence and hearing arguments post the filing of the award in the court is bound to increase litigation costs for parties and add to the already heavy workload of courts. This again defeats the purpose of arbitration as an economical and efficient alternative dispute resolution mechanism. The recording of evidence and conducting a trial effectively converts the court into an appellate or fact-finding forum, which would be contrary to the statutory scheme envisaged by the 1940 Act. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
SC calls for mediation first in litigation
The Supreme Court has called for embracing a pro-mediation approach across the judiciary, particularly at the earliest stages of litigation. In a detailed four-page order authored by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, the top court stressed the importance of sensitising judges and lawyers to identify cases appropriate for mediation and to ensure their timely referral. "Judges and lawyers must be sensitised to identify cases fit for mediation and facilitate their referral in a timely manner. Litigants, likewise, should be encouraged to consider mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution as a first resort, rather than a last recourse," the order states. The directive came during the hearing of a family dispute that the court, on March 15, referred to mediation. Sara Tarrar, an advocate of the high court and an accredited mediator notified by the Law and Justice Division under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, was appointed as the mediator. According to the order, both parties actively participated in the mediation process and ultimately reached a settlement. Tarrar submitted her report, along with a copy of the settlement agreement dated May 5, 2025, which was officially recorded by the court. Counsel for both sides requested that a decree be issued in line with the agreed settlement. A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, heard the matter. The case involved a challenge to a family court decision that had increased monthly maintenance for each daughter from Rs30,000 to Rs150,000, in addition to educational expenses. The father had contested the order in appellate courts, where his case was dismissed. He later approached the SC in June 2021. After remaining pending for more than three and a half years, the bench finally referred the matter to mediation, leading to a successful resolution. In its order, the SC underlined that mediation was "not merely an alternative to litigation; it is a paradigm shift in dispute resolution, built on the principles of collaboration, confidentiality, and party autonomy". Unlike traditional litigation, the order said, mediation empowers parties to shape the outcomes of their disputes through neutral facilitation rather than adversarial judgment. "It offers a nonadversarial framework that empowers parties to shape the outcome of their own disputes, guided by a neutral facilitator rather than a judicial determination." The order highlighted several advantages of mediation, including cost-effectiveness, speed, reduced burden on the judiciary and greater privacy for the disputing parties. Its informal setting fosters open dialogue and solution-focused negotiation. "The flexibility of the process allows parties to explore creative, interest-based solutions that a court of law may not be empowered to grant," the order notes. "These benefits were remarkably evident in the present case. What years of litigation could not resolve, mediation achieved within weeks." The court observed that earlier recourse to mediation often results in substantial savings of time and cost, reduces emotional tolls and helps restore relationships. The order cited the statutory framework established under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, and further supported by various provincial legislations. In addition, the ADR Mediation Accreditation (Eligibility) Rules, 2023 and Mediation Practice Direction (Civil) Rules, 2023, have consolidated mediation's place in the judicial landscape as a mainstream tool for dispute resolution.
Business Recorder
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
AI should support, not replace, human judgment in courts: Justice Aurangzeb
Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb of the Supreme Court of Pakistan underscored the critical need for Artificial Intelligence (AI) to serve as a tool to assist, rather than replace, human judgment in the judicial system. Speaking at the Annual Symposium for Judges on Thursday, Justice Aurangzeb said while AI is 'undoubtedly the need of the hour,' it must be implemented with care, ensuring that human intellect and reasoning remain central to judicial decision-making. The symposium was organised by the Ministry of Law & Justice in collaboration with the Federal Judicial Academy and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The event brought together jurists and policymakers to explore the evolving landscape of digital justice in Pakistan. IHC concerned at govt failure to recover missing persons Barrister Aqeel Malik, Minister of State for Law & Justice, lauded the symposium's focus on digital transformation and the empowerment of the judiciary. 'Judges, as guardians of justice, must be at the heart of innovation in the legal system,' he said, adding that the responsible use of technology could enhance transparency, responsiveness, and inclusiveness, without compromising fairness or constitutional values. Federal Secretary for Law & Justice, Raja Naeem Akbar, who chaired the opening session, reaffirmed the government's commitment to modernising legal infrastructure. He spotlighted ongoing digital initiatives, including the Pakistan Code, the Document Retrieval System (DRS), and the Case Assignment and Management System (CAMS). In his welcome address, the Director General of the Federal Judicial Academy emphasised the importance of keeping pace with technological evolution. 'History shows that societies that adapt endure—those that don't, fade,' he said. The day-long symposium featured a series of panel discussions and presentations focused on integrating technology into judicial processes while preserving the rule of law.
