Latest news with #YahyaAfridi
Business Recorder
15 hours ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
‘The mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned': SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court clarified that mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned. A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, ruled that while hearing the petitions of Chief Land Commissioner and Punjab/ Senior Member Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore against the Lahore High Court (LHC)'s order. The same bench, in dismissal of the application for pre-arrest bail by the LHC on 19.11.2024, maintained; 'Prompt and faithful enforcement of judicial orders is fundamental to the criminal justice system. Once pre-arrest bail is declined by a competent court of law and the accused stands exposed to arrest in accordance with law.' Both the judgments were authored by Yahya Afridi. In revenue department case, the judgment noted that the LHC over a decade ago directed revenue authorities to re-decide the matter in accordance with law. Despite such clear directions, the Deputy Land Commissioner, Bahawalpur, failed to act, resulting in unreasonable and unexplained delay. The judgment said when superior courts issue remand directions, they are to be complied with faithfully and expeditiously. Such failure is contrary to the constitutional duty of all authorities to act in aid of judicial orders. It clarified; 'The mere pendency of any appeal, revision, or constitutional petition does not, of itself, stay the execution or implementation of the order impugned. This principle is expressly embodied in Order XX Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980. The judgment noted that in Rashid Baig vs. Muhammad Mansha (2024 SCMR 1385) the apex court made it clear; 'that mere pendency of a petition before this Court does not, by itself, operate as a stay of proceedings, which may only be lawfully restrained by an express injunctive order of the Court. Thus, administrative inaction premised on the mere pendency of further proceedings, without any lawful restraint, is both unjustified and impermissible.' The judgment said regrettable that despite the clear pronouncement of this Court in Rashid Baig's case expressing disapproval of such misuse of procedural pendency, the same practice continues unabated. This reflects not merely individual lapses, but a persistent pattern of administrative disregard for binding remand orders, which in itself constitutes systemic failure requiring urgent redress. The judgment reiterated that failure by the relevant authorities to observe established principles requiring prompt compliance with remand orders would frustrate the administration of justice and violate their constitutional duty. In dismissal of pre-arrest bail case, the Supreme Court clarified that any practice whereby police authorities treat the mere filing of a petition before the Supreme Court as an implied stay or bar to arrest, despite the dismissal of pre-arrest bail, indicates a misunderstanding of the purpose of pre-arrest bail. This relief exists as an exceptional measure to protect individuals against arbitrary or malafide arrest, where circumstances clearly warrant such protection. Once a competent court has declined pre-arrest bail, it has necessarily determined that no such exceptional circumstances exist and arrest is lawful and necessary to ensure an effective investigation. Allowing the mere act of filing another petition to operate as a de facto stay would render that judicial determination meaningless, defeat the objective of ensuring prompt and fair investigation, and risk abuse of process by enabling accused persons to indefinitely evade arrest without any legal basis. Therefore, judicial orders must remain binding and enforceable unless and until a competent court expressly orders otherwise. It must be remembered that interim protection is not automatic; it must be specifically sought and expressly granted. Absent such an order, a refusal of bail remains fully operative and must be implemented promptly and in good faith by investigating authorities. The Court said the practice of delaying or avoiding arrest on the pretext of a pending petition raises serious concerns, as it essentially frustrates and weakens ongoing investigations and undermines the authority and finality of judicial orders. In addition, such a practice risks promoting a culture of impunity, enabling accused persons to evade the process of law by exploiting systemic inaction. The judgment said that investigating officers and police authorities are legally bound to act upon court orders dismissing pre-arrest bail immediately, without waiting for further instructions or presuming the existence of any stay where none has been granted. Administrative convenience, internal practice, or mere pendency of higher-forum proceedings cannot justify or excuse failure to act in accordance with law. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Revamping mode of ADRC appointments: FBR seeks input from stakeholders
ISLAMABAD: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) is seeking input from different stakeholders to revamp the mode and manner of appointing Members of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee. Director General (Law) of FBR Dr Ishtiaq told Business Recorder; 'We are seeking input from different stakeholders and after consultation will prepare the report. Hopefully it will make the ADRC more transparent and credible.' A two-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, on 3rd July while hearing the Zarai Taraqiati Bank Ltd's petition had directed the FBR to submit report on ADRC on 24-07-25. FBR refuses to share info about ADRCs cases Dr Ishtiaq had told the Court that the FBR is open to any constructive suggestions regarding ADRC proceedings, as mandated under the law. CJP Yahya, therefore, allowed the FBR to consult with the stakeholders. Advocate Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, constitutional and tax law expert, said the need for an effective and structured Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system, particularly in tax matters, has become critical. He maintained that the conventional litigation model has not only overwhelmed the judiciary but has also severely impaired the state's ability to realise tax revenues in a timely manner. Thousands of tax cases involving hundreds of billions of rupees are languishing before appellate tribunals, High Courts, and the Supreme Court, creating uncertainty for businesses, discouraging investment, and delaying revenue recovery. A credible ADR system is now essential for easing this burden, restoring taxpayer confidence, and ensuring fiscal efficiency. He observed that despite having enabling statutory provisions for ADR under Section 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001; Section 47A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990; Section 38 of the Federal Excise Act, 2005; and Section 195C of the Customs Act, 1969, Pakistan has yet to operationalize ADR in a meaningful way. The reasons for this failure are well-known: lack of transparency in constituting ADR Committees, inclusion of serving tax officers on panels, absence of qualified and neutral arbitrators, lack of digital infrastructure, and the non-binding nature of ADR outcomes—especially in factual disputes. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
5 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Fairness, accountability, rule of law: CJP reaffirms unwavering commitment to universal principles
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi said the only antidote of maladies like human rights violation, terrorism, climate change, human trafficking and transnational crimes is the rule of law. The CJP in a message on the World Day for International Justice, issued on Thursday, reaffirmed unwavering commitment to the universal principles of fairness, accountability and the rule of law. He stated, 'This day we stand in front of a stark reality that justice is not limited to an isolated act of piety or responsibility of an institution. Rather it is a sacred collective obligation towards fellow human beings in all aspects of their lives. Importantly, justice is not confined by borders, it is a shared aspiration of humanity and a cornerstone of peace, dignity and human rights.' 'In a world confronted by incredibly complex global challenges like social conflicts, human rights violation, terrorism, climate change, displacements, human trafficking and transnational crimes, the role of justice systems, both national and international, becomes ever more pivotal.' 'The only antidote for all these maladies is the rule of law, safeguarding the rights of the vulnerable, upholding the dignity of individuals and protecting societies from tyranny and oppression,' he added. CJP Yahya Afridi said, 'Pakistan's judiciary, as a responsive institution, stands in solidarity with global efforts to strengthen international justice mechanisms. Recognizing the vital role of International Criminal Court and Criminal Tribunals, we genuinely acknowledge the efforts for reinforcing a global culture of justice and deterrence. 'At the national level, we are committed to ensuring that access to justice is timely, impartial and effective. We continue to invest in judicial reforms, digital transformation and capacity-building to make our courts more responsive to the needs of the people, especially the marginalized, the voiceless and the underserved. 'Let this day be a call to deepen our resolve that the cause of justice is not passive, it demands courage, vision and cooperation across institutions and borders. Together, let us strive for a world where justice prevails not only in the courtroom but also in the lives of all people,' the message concluded. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
7 days ago
- Business
- Express Tribune
Top court stays ADRC proceedings
The Supreme Court has ordered a stay on proceedings in all cases currently pending before the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committees (ADRCs), which function under the administrative control of the FBR to handle tax-related matters, especially those involving state entities. The order came from a division bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, which issued a two-page directive. It noted that during proceedings, it was brought to the court's attention that the FBR, in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice, was in the process of overhauling the mechanism for appointing members to the ADRCs. The FBR's legal member submitted before the bench that the revenue body remains open to constructive suggestions regarding the ADRC proceedings as mandated by law. Taking note, the court observed it would be appropriate for the FBR to first examine the matter in detail. Accordingly, the bench directed the FBR to consult with Shahid Jamil, counsel for the petitioner (ZTBL), counsel for the respondent (FBR), amicus curiae Sultan Mazhar Sher Khan, the Attorney General for Pakistan and the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice. The order further directed that the FBR must "duly consider the opinions and input" of these stakeholders before finalising the proposed framework for appointing ADRC members. "A report in this regard shall be submitted before this Court prior to the next date of hearing. In the meantime, proceedings in all cases currently pending before the ADRC shall remain stayed till 24.07.2025," the court stated. Shahid Jamil, counsel for ZTBL, maintained that transparency must be ensured in the appointment of ADRC members. However, legal experts remain divided on the current state of ADRCs and their role in dispute resolution. One lawyer representing a state-owned enterprise (SOE) argued that the ADRC mechanism has proven "destructive" for SOEs. "They are being crushed with taxation and have no remedy against the ADRC," he said, alleging that billions of rupees in taxes were forcibly recovered in June without the legally required notices, simply to meet revenue targets. "All profit-making SOEs are being destroyed," he added. Another lawyer contended that the ADRC should function independently and without FBR's influence to be credible. On the other hand, Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmad, who has represented the FBR in numerous cases, defended the institution. He explained that the FBR was legally empowered to constitute ADR committees for the settlement of tax disputes and to avoid prolonged litigation. However, he acknowledged that the ADR system in Pakistan has struggled due to several structural flaws, including the absence of qualified and independent arbitrators, a lack of transparency in ADRC composition, inadequate digital and institutional infrastructure and, most crucially, the limited binding nature and enforceability of ADR outcomes, particularly when they involve findings of fact.
Express Tribune
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
State-funded legal aid for poor launched
Judicial matters: Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi chairs a meeting of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan in Quetta. Photo: APP Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi said on Monday that a new initiative had been launched to provide assistance to poor litigants to hire legal representation at all levels of the judiciary at the state expense in order to ensure equitable access to justice for all citizens. Chairing a meeting of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan (LJCP) at the Supreme Court Branch Registry in Quetta, he said that a senior representative would be posted in the high courts to liaise with district bar associations and supervise the ongoing justice sector initiatives at the grassroots level. The LJCP meeting was held to review the institutional linkages between the bar associations in Balochistan and the LJCP with a view to strengthening justice delivery, said a press release issued here. During the meeting, the chief justice announced that under the auspices of the LJCP, a new initiative had been launched to provide assistance to poor litigants to hire legal representation, at the state expense, at all levels of the judiciary – from magistrate courts to the Supreme Court. Remuneration of up to Rs50,000 would be given through the District Legal Empowerment Committees, the press release said, adding that the bars might nominate qualified lawyers to the district judges, the high courts, and the Supreme Court in this regard. He also said that the LJCP had decided to post a senior level representative in every province, who would sit in the high courts. These representatives would maintain liaison to raise awareness among district bar associations and identify local priority areas and supervise initiatives at the grassroots level. On the occasion, Chief Justice Afridi urged bar representatives to sensitise their respective bar associations and proactively engage in judicial reform initiatives. He directed that the facilities extended to the bars by the government must be structured to ensure better cost for the money spent.
