Latest news with #26thamendment
Express Tribune
19 hours ago
- 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
6 days ago
- 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.
Express Tribune
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
LHC's May 9 ruling
Listen to article It seems political instability and an unpleasant crisscross with the judiciary is there to stay. The detailed order of a division bench of the LHC that found former PM Imran Khan involved in a 'conspiracy' linked to the May 9 upheavals has come too late, thus putting a question mark on its veracity. The court ironically has summarised its entire contention, reliance and judgment merely on the testimony of two police officials presented by the state prosecution. This is simply a travesty of justice and is in need of a holistic approach to dispense fair play in all judiciousness. It is irksome to note that both the sleuths were present on two different occasions in various parts of Punjab with the accused, and were the only ones to hear him instigate his workers to vandalise state properties in case of his arrest. Thus, the charges of criminal conspiracy and abetment slapped on the incarcerated leader have come to not only delay his lawful bail application, but also to prolong an episode of controversy and discontent that has wrecked socio-political harmony for long. The May 9 buzzword has come a long way. Hundreds of arrested men and women have gone through trials and tribulations. And when the tale was nearing its legal and logical end, as judgments and lawful interpretations of proceedings are in order, this new trial after two years hints at nothing but vendetta. It is a foregone conclusion that the judiciary is under pressure, especially after the 26th amendment, and dispensing an impartial trial to the imprisoned opposition party members is a remote possibility. It is, thus, incumbent upon the judiciary to see that justice is seen to be done, and the cases should not be heard and decided in limbo without seeking relevant pieces of witnesses as ordained by law. Learned Justice Athar Minallah had a point, when he told an audience at the Supreme Court, that the society is polarising owing to the phenomenon that the state is trying to construe self-concocted decisions. Time to step back from this disgusting tendency.
Express Tribune
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Of benches and judges!
Listen to article As an outcome of the controversial 26th amendment, the formation of the Supreme Court's Constitutional Bench is under the scanner. Conventionally, the constitution of benches and the nomination of 'like-minded' judges come under discussion as and when it pertains to hearing of high-profile litigations. This time around, a review petition challenging the majority decision of July 12, 2024 on the reserved seats is under question. The Sunni Ittehad Council's intention to challenge the composition of the existing 11-member constitutional bench has stirred a debate on how long this precedent of mistrust in superior judiciary will linger on the premise of political connotations. Our political history testifies to the fact that judicial decisions, at times, have not been sacrosanct and leaned on the wrong side of the divide for reasons of exigency, trampling the judiciary's credibility in contravention of the dictates of the Constitution. In this Armageddon, all political parties were found to be tainting their image for a time-served concession as they went on to torpedo the spirit of rule of law and merit in decision-making. This has to come to an end, and the way forward is to unite on a monolithic principle of letting the judiciary be free from executive coercions and dispense its duties with independence and fair play. It is also incumbent at this point of time to revisit the 26th amendment and take a judicial review to ascertain whether the principle of the separation of powers is functioning as per the Constitution. The so-called 'court-packing' under the amendment has led to widespread societal unrest, as the executive holds a sway over judiciary in terms of bench formation, allegedly dictating it and sidelining senior judges. The case under review, and the bench in vogue, have also hit some legal snags as the review petition is not being heard by the honourable judges who authored the July 12 decision. This altercation, already raised by a bona fide judge on the bench, as well as the SIC concerns on judges' leaning must get a fair hearing too for the sake of transparency and broad-based legitimacy.
Express Tribune
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Imaan quits IHCBA positionin protest
Human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari has resigned from her position as the chairperson of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association's (IHCBA) committee on enforced disappearances. In a letter addressed to the IHCBA president on Monday, Mazari stated that she made the decision in protest against the "condemnable and cowardly" decision of the bar to withdraw its petitions against the 26th amendment and the transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC). Expressing her disappointment and shock over the move, she said the decision compromised on the principled position taken by former IHCBA president Riasat Ali Azad.
