# Pakistan Supreme Court updates



## ghazi52

*Fake testimony biggest impediment in justice system: CJP Khosa*
*27 July,2019*







Model courts are playing their role for speedy justice: CJP

LAHORE (Dunya News) – Chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa said fake testimonies are the biggest hurdle to the justice system. He said it is the basic right of every citizen to get justice from the courts.

Addressing a workshop at Judicial Academy, he said the eye witness give wrong testimony in murder cases. He said we are providing standard education to young lawyers and to investigators.

CJP said the model courts are playing their role for speedy justice. He said the burden on High Courts have reduced after the establishment of model courts.

Talking about police reforms, the top judge said a committee of 9 judges has been formed to introduce reforms in police system. He said the committee would work for better image of police in the eyes of public. He said police have solved 71000 complaints in three months.

He said a modern research center would be established to help judges in provision of speedy justice. He said facility of voice typing would also be provided to judges.

He said special courts would be established to hear cases related to gender discrimination.


----------



## ghazi52

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the formation of a larger bench to determine the exact length for a life sentence.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, took notice of the issue while hearing a petition to reduce a convict's life sentence into half.

Haroonul Rashid was sentenced to life imprisonment 12 times in 12 different cases of murder. He has been in jail since 1997 and has served a 22-year sentence, Rashid's lawyer told the court while adding that the court had allowed for the 12 sentences to be served concurrently.

"Is it not a misconception that a life sentence spans over 25 years?" the chief justice asked.
"When we don't know how long a person is going to live, how can we halve a life sentence," he added.

"I had been waiting for a long time for a case where we could determine the span of a life sentence. In a jail sentence, days and nights are both counted. In this manner, a convict comes out within five years.

"It is time that we clear up these major misconceptions and figure out the span of a life sentence. It is a matter of public interest."

The court issued notices to the attorney general, provincial advocate generals and prosecutor general. The court also ordered for the registrar office to fix the matter for hearing in the first week of October.

Last month, the chief justice had showed his intent reexamining the life imprisonment law "at an appropriate time".

This is not the first time that the judiciary has made such observations. In 2004, a five-member bench heard as many as 62 appeals that urged the apex court to reinstate death penalty for convicts whose capital punishments were commuted into life imprisonment leading to their release on the basis of remission in their imprisonment periods.

Section 57 of the Pakistan Penal Code, Fractions of terms of punishment, says: "In calculating fractions of terms of punishment, imprisonment for life shall be reckoned as equivalent to imprisonment for twenty-five years."

The Supreme Court, however, had observed in 2004 that the provisions of the aforementioned section, which reckon 25-year imprisonment as transportation for life, only stipulate the calculation of the punishment term which is necessary because certain offences are a fraction of the term of imprisonment prescribed for other offences.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC accepts review petition seeking Sindh CM Murad Ali Shah's disqualification*
Haseeb Bhatti
August 06, 2019






Petitioner claims Shah owned an iqama and had Canadian nationality when he submitted nomination papers for 2013 elections. — DawnNewsTV/File
The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday accepted for hearing a review petition for the disqualification of Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Azmat Saeed, sent Shah a notice to appear before the court in the case.

Petitioner Roshan Ali Buriro's lawyer Hamid Khan argued that Shah gave a false declaration while submitting his qualification papers for the 2013 election and that he was holding an _iqama_ and dual nationality at the time.

In January, Supreme Court threw out Buriro's application seeking Shah's disqualification on the grounds that the petitioner had failed to produce enough arguments to satisfy the court.

At the time, Justice Umer Ata Bandial had pointed out that the Sindh chief minister had renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2013, therefore, he could not be disqualified on those grounds.

The bench had further said that the petitioner's intent was questionable as he was a political opponent of Shah.

"The prima facie [grounds for] disqualification are not clear in this case," Justice Bandial had said at the time.

"Shah did not submit any paperwork showing that he had given up his Canadian nationality and the court disqualified him on this basis," the lawyer told the court during Tuesday's maintainability hearing.

During the hearing, Justice Bandial — who was part of the SC bench that heard the original petition — pointed out that a court declaration regarding Article 62 is required in the matter. Upon this, Justice Saeed said that a court order suffices as a court declaration.

"Every electoral candidate provides a declaration to the returning officer and Article 62(1)(f) of the constitution applies to any declarations that are not based on the truth," Justice Saeed said, accepting the review petition.


----------



## ghazi52

*Nawaz disqualified for concealing assets, submitting fake testimony: SC*








ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Saturday said former premier Nawaz Sharif was disqualified for not declaring assets and submitting a fake testimony.

The apex court observed that non-declaration of assets in nomination forms had made the system and people corrupt. Announcing its verdict on disqualification of a member assembly, the Supreme Court said any ease given to members in this regard would be harmful.

The court said the results of non-declaration of assets would not be good. It further said actionable steps must be taken to tackle this situation, adding that PML-N leader Muhammad Nawaz Sharif had concealed assets of Capital FZE in 2013 nomination forms. In the verdict, the court said public representatives were not honest according to Article 62-1F of the Constitution and the court could not ignore the concealing of assets and submitting fake testimony.


----------



## ghazi52

*'No shortcuts in the path of justice,' says SC's Justice Azmat Saeed in farewell speech*
August 27, 2019






Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed (L), last month took oath as acting chief justice of Pakistan. — INP/File
A full-court reference was held on Tuesday at the Supreme Court in honour of Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, who has reached superannuation.

Headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, the ceremony was attended by senior judges and lawyers including the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association and vice-chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC).

In his farewell speech at the reference, Justice Saeed highlighted the importance of an independent judiciary, saying "The justice system of Pakistan has been established after a lot of hard work, brick-by-brick."

"I hope no shortcuts will come in the way of [provision of] justice," he added.

Justice Saeed also expressed the hope that his fellow judges will remain aware of the difference between "judicial anarchy and justice".

He said it was no less than an honour for him to serve the people by becoming a part of the judiciary. "Everyone should play their part for the provision of justice," the judge advised.

Chief Justice Khosa in his remarks termed Justice Saeed an asset of the superior judiciary, saying it had been his honour to have worked with him.

He noted that the outgoing judge had penned several historic verdicts and untangled several uncertain matters during his time at the top court.

"Justice Saeed's belief in the rule of law and Constitution is evident from his judgements," Justice Khosa remarked.

Lauding Justice Saeed's services for the judiciary, Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan noted that the judge had written important verdicts concerning military courts and the right to a fair trial.

"The judiciary is losing a capable judge today," he said, pay respect to Justice Saeed on behalf of the federal government.

PBC vice chairman Syed Amjad Shah in his address accused the government of using tactics to suppress "dissenting voices".

"Should institutions be allowed to exceed their authority? Are the parliament and courts functioning independently?" he asked.

He said the Supreme Court should bind every institution to stay within its constitutional limits, adding that interference in political matters damages the reputation of the judiciary.

The PBC vice chairman also expressed concern at what he said was "out-of-turn hearing" of references against certain superior court judges.

He said he hoped a full-court bench of the SC will hear the applications against the presidential reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

*In brief: Justice Saeed's career*

Justice Saeed was first enrolled as an advocate of the High Court of Lahore (LHC) in 1980 and was promoted to advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan the subsequent year. Justice Saeed also served as special prosecutor of the Ehtesab Bureau in 1997 and was a member of the legal team prosecuting many high profile cases at the LHC.

He served as special prosecutor National Accountability Bureau in 2001. Justice Saeed was appointed as an additional Judge of the LHC in 2004. In 2012, he was elevated as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.


----------



## ghazi52

*CJP cautions against perception of lopsided accountability*

September 11, 2019
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2053974/1-cjp-cautions-perception-lopsided-accountability/




Chief Justice Pakistan (CJP) Justice Asif Saeed Khosa. PHOTO COURTESY: RADIO PAKISTAN

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Pakistan (CJP) Justice Asif Saeed Khosa on Wednesday cautioned against the growing perception of ‘lopsided accountability’ and said such perceptions could be dangerous.

Addressing a full-court ceremony on Wednesday marking the new judicial year at the Supreme Court, he said: “We as a relevant organ of the state also feel that the growing perception that the process of accountability being pursued in the country at present is lopsided and is a part of political engineering is a dangerous perception…”


The chief justice added that remedial steps need to be taken “urgently so that the process does not lose credibility”.

“Recovery of stolen wealth of the citizenry is a noble cause and it must be legitimately and legally pursued where it is due but if in the process the constitutional and legal morality of the society and the recognised standards of fairness and impartiality are compromised then retrieval of the lost constitutional and legal morality may pose an even bigger challenge to the society at large in the days to come,” said the Justice Khosa.

He also referred to bar associations concerned with receding political space in the governance of the state and stressed that “such concerns cannot be ignored”.

“As an important and independent organ of the state responsible for safeguarding the constitutional ethos of the country we feel that such loss of political space in [the] governance of the state may not augur well for the future of the country as a constitutional democracy.”

Commenting on reports regarding media censorship in the country, Justice Khosa said: “Voices [are] being raised about [the] muzzling of the print and electronic media and suppression of dissent are also disturbing. It must be appreciated by all concerned that a voice suppressed or an opinion curbed generates frustration, frustration gives rise to discontent and increasing discontent poses a serious threat to the democratic system itself.”

“Constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens ought never to be compromised for the sake of short-term political or governance advantages.”

With regards to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), the CJP elaborated that it “was mandated by the Constitution to inquire into conduct of judges of the superior judiciary and I must say that the job to be performed in that regard is the most unpleasant job that its chairman and members are to perform in their entire judicial careers. Nonetheless, it is a constitutional duty they cannot refuse to perform.”

“The Constitution empowers the president to direct the council to inquire into the conduct of a judge and the council cannot disregard such a constitutionally mandated direction and it must inquire as directed. It, however, goes without saying that such a direction to inquire does not, and cannot, control the opinion to be formed by the Council after inquiring into the matter,” said Justice Khosa in a clear reference to the Supreme Court judge Qazi Faez Isa and the Sindh High Court (SHC) judge KK Agha case, facing presidential references for allegedly not disclosing foreign properties in their wealth statements.

Justice Khosa also called out “a section of the society” for being unhappy that the apex court was slow in taking suo motu actions over issues where they was demanded.

He said, “…a suo motu notice taken on a demand of somebody else may not be suo motu and would be a contradiction in terms. This court shall take suo motu notice of a matter only when it feels the necessity or utility for it and not when it is coaxed in that regard by outsiders”

“Be that as it may, at present this Court is practising judicial activism of a different kind. Instead of judicial activism, it is practising active judicialism.”


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court orders private schools to restore fee amount to that of Jan 2017*
September 13, 2019






A three-member Supreme Court bench "struck down" any increase in fee charged by private schools since 2017.
A three-judge Supreme Court bench on Friday struck down any increase in private schools' fee since 2017 in its verdict on appeals pertaining to exorbitant hikes by private institutions.

In a 65-page verdict, the court said that private schools had "excessively increased fee since 2017 in violation of the law" and that the charges should be restored to what they were in January 2017 and the additional amount be "struck down".

"It will be deemed that there was no increase in fee since 2017 and fees were frozen at the rates prevailing in January 2017," the ruling read.

The verdict said that any increase in school fees must be in accordance with the laws and that any recalculation be made "using the fee prevailing in 2017 as the base fee". The recalculation method, the top court said, must be supervised by regulators and the amount charged must be "approved by them [and] shall be treated as the chargeable fee".

The verdict also forbade the schools to recover "under any circumstances" the amounts that were reduced in accordance with the Supreme Court's 2018 ruling — which ordered a 20 per cent reduction in the fees charged by upscale private schools.

"The regulators shall closely monitor the fee being charged by private schools to ensure strict compliance with the law and the rules/regulations. Complaint cells shall be set up to deal with complaints arising out of increase in fee in violation of the law/rules/regulations," the verdict read.

The three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Faisal Arab, heard the appeals filed by parents of students as well as private schools.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC bans high courts from raising objections to trial courts' verdicts*





https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/web-desk
September 14, 2019

The Supreme Court of Pakistan, in a striking verdict on Saturday, barred high courts from raising objections to trial courts’ judges and their verdicts.

However, it maintained that in case of any reservation(s) or objections, the administrative committee could be approached in a written form, for taking any possible disciplinary action.

The top court has further restricted high courts from summoning judges during an appeal of any case in the court.

Thereby, the SCP has approved an appeal of Additional District and Sessions Judge Nusrat Yasmeen.

The Supreme Court has directed the Peshawar High Court (PHC) to not include objections against Judge Nusrat Yaseem as part of his service record.

Besides, the court has ordered to dispatch copies of the ruling to all judges of the high courts.


----------



## ghazi52

September 18, 2019

Garbage should be removed from different sites in Islamabad on an emergency basis, ruled the Supreme Court while hearing the Bani Gala encroachment case on Wednesday.

The CDA chairperson and mayor have been ordered to submit progress reports in a month.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that the authorities have displayed ‘bureaucratic behaviour’ in court. “We were told something and the reality was something else,” he observed.

He remarked that a dumping site was shown only in documents, and that no designated location for the city's waste was being used to isolate trash from the city.

The government needs to come up with cheap and effective solutions to solve different problems in the city, said Justice Ijazul Ahsan.

On April 4, the top court came down hard on the CDA chairperson over Islamabad’s sanitation situation. The bench remarked that Islamabad has become dirtier than Karachi or Lahore.

“The CDA has turned the Rawal Dam into a gutter. Islamabad has grown dirtier than Karachi and Lahore,” said Justice Gulzar Ahmed. “The civic agency is exclusively concerned with recreational points for the elite.”


----------



## ghazi52

*Man acquitted in blasphemy case after 18 years in prison*

September 26, 2019






The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted a man who had been condemned to death in a blasphemy case in 2002 and had consequently remained behind bars for 18 years. — AFP/File
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted a man who had been condemned to death in a blasphemy case in 2002 and had consequently remained behind bars for 18 years.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, exonerated Wajih-ul-Hassan from blasphemy charges under Section 295-C (use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet [Peace Be Upon Him]) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) for want of concrete evidence against him.

The court observed that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the letters, which became the basis of blasphemy allegations against Mr Hassan, were actually written by him, and consequently rejected the case.

Additional Prosecutor General (APG) of Punjab Mohammad Amjad Rafiq pleaded the case against Mr Hassan through a video link from Lahore.

Elaborating, the APG told _Dawn_ that the allegations stemmed from the letters the accused had allegedly written to a senior lawyer namely Ismail Qureshi after the latter succeeded in getting a favourable judgement from the Federal Shariat Court (FSC).

The lawyer had sought amendments to the PPC by raising the plea that the government should be directed to delete the sentence of life imprisonment from the law and instead maintain the death penalty as the only punishment for committing the grave offence.

Consequently, the FSC in 1991 ordered the government to bring amendments to the law by April 30, 1991, otherwise it would be deemed to have been amended by proposing only capital punishment for committing blasphemy.

The APG said that the accused had written five letters to Advocate Qureshi in 1998 while using the name of Hassan Murshid Masih. “The first letter was burnt by the lawyer for being too sacrilegious, but he received a series of letters.

“Later Mr Qureshi received another letter from Umar Nawaz Butt who told the lawyer that he knew the writer who had allegedly committed blasphemy, and revealed his real name with his mailing address and a copy of his national identity card. Mr Butt also said he had dispatched copies of the letter to the then prime minister and the then chief minister of Punjab.

“Mr Qureshi approached Iqbal Town police station of Lahore’s Moon Market area to lodge an FIR against Mr Hassan. Initially the police showed reluctance by saying they would seek the opinion of the Ulema Board whether these letters fell under the purview of blasphemy or not.”

According to the lawyer, finally the police registered the case against Mr Hassan under Section 295-C of the PPC, on the charge of committing blasphemy, on March 31, 1999 when Advocate Qureshi filed a petition in the Lahore High Court (LHC). The police then raided the residence of the accused in Kot Abdul Malik, Sheikhupura district.

“On May 21, 2001, the accused confessed before Mohammad Waseem, the manager of a steel/iron factory where he worked, of having committed the crime,” the AGP said. Waseem and his friend Mohammad Naveed got Mr Hassan’s ‘extrajudicial confession’ on a paper and took him to the police station where he was arrested.

On May 28, 2001, a handwriting expert, after examining handwriting specimen of the accused, said in his report that the writing of the accused closely matched with the letters in question.

Accordingly, an additional district and sessions judge of Lahore convicted Mr Hassan and awarded him death sentence. The decision was later maintained by the Lahore High Court.

However, the Supreme Court has acquitted Mr Hassan on the grounds that the ‘extra-judicial confession’ and corroboratory evidence — the handwriting expert’s report — were always considered weak evidence under the law and since there were no direct witness therefore the apex court had no option but to order release of the accused after exonerating him from all charges.

Currently, the accused is imprisoned in Kot Lakhpath Jail, Lahore, since the trial court had sentenced him to death under Section 295-C of the PPC and 10-year jail term under Section 295-A of the PPC.

While deciding the case of Aasia Bibi — a Christian lady facing death sentence on blasphemy charges — the apex court on Oct 31, 2018, had held that it was not for individuals or a gathering (mob) to decide whether any act falling within the purview of Section 295-C had been committed or not because it was the court’s mandate to make such decisions after conducting a fully qualified trial on the basis of credible evidence.

“Presumption of innocence remains throughout the case until such time the prosecution on the evidence satisfies the court beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the offence alleged against him, the judgement says.

“There cannot be a fair trial, which is itself the primary purpose of criminal jurisprudence, if the judges have not been able to clearly elucidate the rudimentary concept of the standard of proof that prosecution must meet in order to obtain a conviction,” the judgment says.


----------



## ghazi52

October 01, 2019





Parveen Rehman, a social worker who devoted her life to the development of the impoverished neighbourhoods across the country, was shot dead near her office in Orangi Town in 2013. — Jutice for Parween Rehman/File

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, while hearing a case pertaining to the 2013 murder of social worker Parween Rehman, admonished law enforcement agencies, saying they seemed "helpless before land and water mafias".

"This matter is turning into a mystery," remarked Justice Ijazul Ahsan, who was part of the bench. "Six years have gone by already, what are the law enforcement agencies doing?"

The three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, asked Babar Bakht Qureshi, who is heading the joint investigation team (JIT) probing the matter, about the findings of the case. Qureshi said that there were no major developments and urged the court to give the JIT more time to investigate. He told the bench that since the murder happened six years ago, the JIT could not obtain any data through geofencing.

Justice Ahsan told Qureshi that the JIT had been constituted because law enforcement agencies were not doing their job.

"What are law enforcement agencies doing since 2013? Are these mafias out of their reach?" asked Justice Ahsan.

"Mafias have killed people who are involved in social work," said Justice Bandial.

The court granted Qureshi two months to wrap up investigation and directed him to submit an interim report in three weeks.

Read: JIT sees ‘land mafia’ behind Perween Rehman’s murder

In June, it emerged that investigators were still trying to collect “basic forensic and circumstantial evidence” related to the murder as two joint investigation teams reportedly overlooked the basic things to resolve the mystery surrounding the high-profile killing.

This disclosure came in an interim report filed in the Supreme Court, where the slain activist’s sister Aquila Ismail moved an application for reinvestigation of the case by the Federal Investigation Agency.

Rehman, a social worker who devoted her life to the development of the impoverished neighbourhoods across the country, was shot dead near her office in Orangi Town in 2013.

The very next day, police killed a Taliban operative named Qari Bilal in an encounter and claimed he was the murderer, resulting in a closure of the case.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan in April 2014 ordered authorities to conduct a fresh probe into Parveen Rehman's murder after a judicial inquiry had revealed that police officers had manipulated the investigation.

A JIT report in 2018 had explained three possible theories behind the motive — the work of TTP or the jihadi elements against the vision of Rehman; second, the illegal water and hydrant mafia in the city; and lastly, the organised crime groups involved in land-grabbing because she was striving to help residents of Goth Abad Schemes to secure their land rights.


----------



## ghazi52

*CJP questions why life sentence corresponds to maximum imprisonment of 25 years*

October 2, 2019
https://tribune.com.pk/story/207055...ce-corresponds-maximum-imprisonment-25-years/




Justice Asif Saeed Khosa. PHOTO: EXPRESS

ISLAMABAD: The Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa on Wednesday questioned why life sentence corresponded to the maximum imprisonment of 25 years.

A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by the CJP resumed hearing of the case to determine the span of life imprisonment. The CJP said that it was matter of principles which will affect thousands of cases.

“How life imprisonment can be fixed for 25 years in prison when the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) is silent on the matter?” the CJP questioned.

Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) members Ahsan Bhoon and Azam Tarar appeared before the bench and stated that the bar wants to become a party to the case.

However, the matter has been postponed as the petitioner requested to file a fresh plea in the case.

Earlier in July, a three-judge bench, led by CJP, questioned whether life imprisonment meant imprisonment of a convict for his remaining biological life or anything shorter than that – and if so, whether different sentences of imprisonment for life passed in the same case or different cases were to run concurrently or consecutively.

“The question has appeared to us to be a question of immense public importance affecting a larger number of cases in the country,” said CJP Khosa.

Currently, the sentence of life imprisonment corresponds to a maximum imprisonment of 25 years, and a minimum of 15 years (per Rule 140 of the Pakistan Prison Rules 1978); after earning remissions as may be extended by the executive functionaries from time-to-time but subject to Section 401 CrPC, Rule 216 and Rule 218 of the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978.

The jail manual also provides for at least a 14-year substantive period for those sentenced to life imprisonment. Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that life imprisonment will be 25 years.

The CJP had hinted at interpreting the ambiguity of the life sentence while hearing review appeal of a death row convict, Abdul Qayyum. During the hearing, Justice Khosa had remarked that the current interpretation of life imprisonment law was flawed.

Referring to judicial practice in India, the chief justice remarked that life sentences in India are given after specifying the period of imprisonment.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court told man give due property to sisters*

The Supreme Court of Pakistan Wednesday ordered a man to provide due share in property to his two sisters.

The apex court conducted the hearing of a case related to the distribution of property which led to a dispute among Abdul Ghafoor, a resident of Peshawar, and his two sisters.

As the hearing went underway, Justice Qazi Faez Isa remarked that the parties have agreed for the distribution of the property. Justice Isa rejected to hear any other plea in the case until the implementation of the previous orders.

Justice Mushir Alam suggested the complainant paying an equivalent amount of money to his sisters in gold if he does not want to get involved in interest-based transactions.

The judge added, “If you want to follow Shariah, then d on’t add your personal desires into it.”

Justice Isa expressed outrage over the failure to implement directives of the court for the transfer of land to Abdul Ghafoor’s sisters despite spending three years in court trying to acquire their rightful property. He remarked, “The order of transferring 100 canal land to your sisters is not implemented since three years.”

The court directed Abdul Ghafoor to submit documents of the transferred land to his two sisters within two weeks and adjourned the hearing.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC suspends election tribunal's decision to deseat Qasim Suri*
October 07, 2019






The Supreme Court on Monday suspended the decision of an election tribunal that [nullified][2] Qasim Suri's election as well as the Election Commission of Pakistan's (ECP) decision to de-notify him as a member of the National Assembly. 

The Supreme Court on Monday suspended the decision of an election tribunal that nullified Qasim Suri's election as well as the Election Commission of Pakistan's (ECP) decision to de-notify him as a member of the National Assembly.

Admitting Suri's appeal for hearing, a three-member of the apex court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial issued notices to the parties in the case.

The top court also asked the election commission not to issue the election schedule for NA-265 (Quetta-II).

In his appeal, filed by Naeem Bukhari, Suri had questioned the jurisdiction of the ECP to unseat him when it was not constituted properly since the five-member commission was short of two members.

On September 27, the Balochistan High Court election tribunal had declared the election of Suri, a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from Balochistan, as void and ordered re-election in the constituency.

Balochistan National Party's (BNP) Nawabzada Lashkari Raisani had challenged Suri's election, alleging rigging.

_Read: NA prorogued abruptly after ECP unseats deputy speaker_

On Wednesday, the National Assembly session, which was scheduled to continue till October 4, was prorogued abruptly within minutes of its commencement. Members of the opposition alleged that the move was aimed at avoiding election to the vacant office of the deputy speaker.

The prorogation came hours after the ECP issued a notification of Suri’s unseating.


----------



## ghazi52

*Definition of terrorism: Convict can’t be released on basis of reconciliation, says SC*

October 12, 2019





ISLAMABAD: A seven-member larger bench of the Supreme Court on Friday announced its judgment on the definition of terrorism and what cases could be tried in the Anti-Terrorism Courts (ATCs) under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997.

Authored by the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, the judgment decreed that the release of a perpetrator on the basis of reconciliation was irreconcilable.

It declared that in an appropriate case, keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence may be considered by a court towards reduction of the sentence, within the permissible limits, passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence.

“In a terrorism case, a reduction in the sentence will not be automatically reduced after reconciliation between the parties,” it added. The apex court ruled that it would be the court’s discretion to consider reducing the offender’s sentence. The crime of terrorism is different from other crimes. The apex court further remarked that the trial court will consider reduction of the sentence after reconciliation in the terror case.

Constituted in April to settle the issue, the bench had reserved the judgment after discussing the ramifications of Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 and “ambiguities” in the law making its implementation problematic.

The court had also deliberated on whether a settlement between the parties in a ‘terrorism’ case was admissible before the court. The verdict noted that the offence of ‘terrorism’ defined in Section 6 and punishable under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 was not a compoundable offence but in many cases the offence of terrorism was committed simultaneously with commission of some other offence and such other coordinate offence may sometimes be a compoundable offence.

“The effect of compounding of such coordinate compoundable offence upon the non-compoundable offence of terrorism or some other non-compoundable offence is a question, which has been referred to the present Larger Bench for resolution,” says the verdict.

The court briefly narrated the circumstances in which the said question in some of the appeals and petitions, including Moinuddin and another V the State and others.

Similarly, the court answered the following questions;

(i) Can a non-compoundable offence be treated as a compoundable offence for the purpose of recording an acquittal in respect of that offence if a coordinate compoundable offence committed in the same case has been compounded by the relevant parties?

(ii) Can the sentence passed in a non-compoundable offence be reduced on the ground that a coordinate compoundable offence committed in the same case has been compounded by the relevant parties?

The court held that it had already been clarified in many a case that the non-compoundable offence of terrorism is an offence distinct and independent from any other coordinate offence also committed in the same case including the offences under sections 302, 365-A, 396 and 460, PPC, etc. and a reference in this respect may be made to the cases of Muhammad Amin v The State (2002 SCMR 1017), Muhammad Ali and others v The State and others (PLD 2004 Lahore 554), Muhammad Rawab v The State (2004 SCMR 1170), Muhammad Akhtar alias Hussain v The State (PLD 2007 SC 447) and Kareem Nawaz Khan v The State through PGP and another (2016 SCMR 291).

“It is hereby held that an offence which the law declares to be non-compoundable remains non-compoundable even if in a coordinate compoundable offence a compounding takes place between the relevant parties and, therefore, despite any compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence an acquittal cannot be recorded in the non-compoundable offence on that sole basis,” says the verdict.

The court declared that consideration of this factor vis-à-vis reduction of the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence lies within the discretion of the court and cannot be treated as automatic or as a matter of course.

The court clarified that in case of compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence reduction of a sentence passed or to be passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence may be considered on that ground by the following courts at the following stages of the case:

(i) by the trial court at the time of passing the sentence at the end of the trial; or

(ii) if compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence takes place at the appellate or revisional stage before a High Court or before this Court at the stage of petition for leave to appeal or appeal or review petition then a prayer for reduction of the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence may be made on that ground before the Court seized of the pending matter; or

(iii) if this Court has already passed a final order or judgment in a petition for leave to appeal or an appeal and no review petition has been filed so far then reduction of the sentence passed for the non-compoundable offence may be sought on the ground of compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence through filing of a review petition before this Court; or

(iv) if the remedy of filing of a review petition before this Court has already been exhausted then, there being no scope for filing of a second or subsequent review petition before this Court and a party to a case or anyone else interested in the matter being in no position to seek revisiting of an earlier order or judgment of this Court, the only remedy left for seeking reduction of the sentence passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence on the ground of compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence is to file a Mercy Petition before the worthy President of Pakistan who may, in his discretion, consider this aspect in the light of the judgments passed by this Court on the subject from time to time; or

(v) if the remedy of a Mercy Petition before the President has already been exhausted before compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence has taken place then after acceptance of the compromise by the competent court in respect of the coordinate compoundable offence the Superintendent of the relevant Jail shall, upon an initiative of the convicted prisoner, forward a fresh Mercy Petition to the President on behalf of that convicted prisoner seeking fresh consideration of the matter by him in respect of the sentence passed against the convicted prisoner for commission of the non-compoundable offence in the light of compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence committed by him.

“When seized of such a fresh Mercy Petition the President may, in his discretion, consider the matter of the convicted prisoner’s sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence afresh in the light of the judgments passed by this Court on the subject from time to time”, the court held and directed its office to fix the appeals and petitions for hearing before its appropriate benches for their decision in terms of the legal position declared through the present judgment.



https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/54...e-released-on-basis-of-reconciliation-says-sc


----------



## ghazi52

*Murder convict can file second mercy plea: SC*

October 12, 2019
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2077726/1-murder-convict-can-file-second-mercy-plea-sc/
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has given another landmark judgement which will reduce death sentence in the country.

A seven-judge larger bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa, on Friday declared that sentence passed in non-compoundable offence like terrorism be reduced on the ground of compromise between parties in compoundable offence committed in the same case.

“It is declared that in an appropriate case, keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence may be considered by a court towards reduction of the sentence, within the permissible limits, passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence,” stated a 27-page judgement authored by the CJP.

The judgement declared that consideration of this factor vis-à-vis reduction of the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence lies within the discretion of the court and cannot be treated as automatic or as a matter of course.

The judgement made it clear that there would be no acquittal in non-compoundable offences like terrorism on the basis of compromise between private parties in compoundable offence in the same case. However, it declared that the convict’s sentence could be reduced in similar situation.

Pakistan Bar Council active member Azam Tarar believed that it was another CJP’s landmark judgement, which would open the window to reduce the death sentence in the country, saying that the verdict would protect life.

“Even the court has also given opportunity to the convict approaching president for second mercy on the basis of compromise in similar matters and the president in his discretion may reduce the conviction in view of the apex court’s verdicts,” said Tarar.

Barrister Asad Rahim said the SC clarified that a non-compoundable offence was distinct and independent from all other offences, and that there could be no acquittal whatsoever on the basis of compromise with private parties in a coordinate, compoundable offence. “There is now room for reduction in sentence, but that too is entirely at the court’s discretion, and only within permissible limits; it can never be automatic or a matter of course.”

*SC allows second mercy petition*

In its judgement, the apex court has also allowed a convicted person to move a second mercy petition to the president of Pakistan for fresh consideration on the basis of compromise between parties in a similar matter.

The court noted that if the remedy of a mercy petition before the president had already been exhausted before compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence took place then after acceptance of the compromise by the competent court the superintendent of the relevant jail shall, upon the initiative of the convicted prisoner, forward a fresh mercy petition to the president seeking fresh consideration of the matter by him in respect of the sentence passed against the convicted prisoner for commission of the non-compoundable offence in the light of compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence committed by him.

“When seized by such a fresh mercy petition the president may, in his discretion, consider the matter of the convicted prisoner’s sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence afresh in the light of the judgements passed by this court on the subject from time to time.”

The court also held that the trail court could reduce the sentence in the same matter after conclusion of the trial. Likewise, if compromise had taken place at the appellate or revisional stage before a high court or apex court at the stage of petition for leave to appeal or appeal or review petition, a prayer for reduction in the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence might be made.


----------



## ghazi52

*FBR turning into a burden: Justice Gulzar*








KARACHI: The Federal Board of Revenue’s (FBR) performance was questioned by the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SBP) during a hearing on Thursday.

Justice Gulzar Ahmed remarked that the board is turning into a burden for the government. “Why hasn’t the board been able to meet its tax targets?” They have employed more than 22,000 people just to collect 20 percent of taxes. More than 80 percent of the taxes are indirect, the judge said.

The court was hearing an appeal filed by the federal board challenging the restoration of Muhammad Anwar Goraya. A two-member bench dismissed the board’s petition in the case. Goraya was posted as an accountant of the Inland Revenue Department in Karachi. He was removed from his post in 2015 over “inefficiency and corruption”. An FBR team had even submitted a report against his conduct. Goraya, however, had challenged his sacking. His appointment was eventually restored by a court.


----------



## ghazi52

*Justice Aminuddin Khan sworn in as Supreme Court judge*
October 21, 2019






Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa administers oath to Justice Aminuddin Khan in a ceremony in Islamabad. 
Lahore High Court's (LHC) senior judge Justice Aminuddin Khan was sworn in as a Supreme Court judge on Monday.

Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa administered the oath in a formal ceremony in Islamabad. The ceremony was attended by judges of the apex court and senior lawyers.

The notification of Justice Khan's appointment had been issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice last week. He was the fifth senior-most judge of the LHC.

Justice Khan started practising in the lower courts in 1985, soon after he was issued a license. In 1987, he was appointed as an advocate of the LHC, and of the Supreme Court in 2001.

He joined Zafar Law Chambers in Multan in 2001 and worked with the legal firm until he was elevated to the position of a judge. He was appointed to the Bench in 2011.

During his career, he assisted renowned lawyers like Mian Nisar Ahmed and Umar Ata Bandial — the latter of whom is slated to become the chief justice in 2022.

Justice Khan has decided thousands of cases pertaining to civil matters and most of his judgments have been upheld by the Supreme Court.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC forms eight benches for next week to hear important cases*






https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/app
*APP*

November 10, 2019

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khan Khosa has constituted eight benches at the principal seat Islamabad to hear a number of important cases during the next week, starting from Monday.

The first bench will comprised of CJP Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel while the second bench consists of Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Maqbool Baqar.

The third bench consist of Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed. Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan will make up the fourth bench, while the fifth bench will consist of Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Munib Akhtar.

The sixth bench will consist of Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Justice Amin0Ud0Din Khan. Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will make up the seventh bench, while the eighth bench will consist of Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Yahya Afridi.

According to case lists, no adjournment on any ground will be granted and no application for adjournment through fax will be placed before the court. Furthermore, if the counsel is unable to appear for any reason, the advocate-on-record will be required to argue the case.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC finds transfer of institutions from Centre to province illegal*







ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday found transfer of the institutions from the federal government to the provincial government unconstitutional and of no legal affect.

The court issued detailed reasons in a matter relating to devolution of health and education sectors after the enactment of 18th Constitutional Amendment.

In January, a five-member bench of the apex court headed by the former chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar had dismissed the appeal of the government of Sindh against the judgment of the Sindh High Court that declared the transfer and devolution of the Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre (JPMC), National Institute of Cardio-Vascular Department (NICVD), the National Institute of Child Health (NICH) and the National Museum to Sindh as unconstitutional.

"We find that the transfer of the institutions from the federal to the provincial government was unconstitutional, in that the institutions did not fall within the Concurrent Legislative List as required by Clause (8) read with Clause (9) of Article 270AA of the Constitution, hence the implementation commission went beyond its constitutional mandate in this regard," read the detailed reasons authored by Justice Ijazul Ahsen.

"Consequently, any purported transfer/devolution of the institutions by the federal government and the subsequent notifications and orders issued pursuant thereto were unlawful and of no legal effect," the detailed reasons added.

The court further found that from a perusal of the entries contained in the Concurrent Legislative List, as it stood prior to its omission by 18th Amendment, that none of them cover any of the institutions, i.e. JPMC, NICVD, NICH and NMP (“Institutions”).

The court noted that Entry No.16 of the Federal Legislative List has two basic requirements: (i) the agency or institute in question must be “federal”; and (ii) such federal agency or institute must be for the purposes of research, professional training, technical training, or the promotion of special studies.

“It is an admitted factthat the JPMC was a federal agency/institute and therefore satisfies the first limb of Entry No.16 of the Federal Legislative List,” said the detailed order.

The court further noted that the hospital and institute aspects of the JPMC are interdependent and mutually supporting. “Bearing in mind the cardinal principle of interpretation that legislative lists ought to be construed liberally and be given the widest amplitude possible, we find that JPMC did fall within Entry No.16 ibid. As regards the first limb of Entry No.16 supra, NICVD was a federal agency/institute. As with JPMC, while it may be hard to say with certainty as to whether the research/training aspect outweighed that of treatment, a perusal of Section 6 of the NICVD Ordinance makes it abundantly clear that the research/training aspect of NICVD is not ancillary or incidental to the functioning of the hospital and therefore, we are of the view that NICVD falls within Entry No.16 supra,” says the detailed order.

The court further held that Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases (Sindh Administration) Act, 2014 (“NICVD Sindh Act”) is basically a replica of the NICVD Ordinance.

"The former appears to have been enacted to displace the latter. We find this act of the provincial assembly attempting in effect to overturn a federal law and nullify the same to be unconstitutional, particularly considering the fact that NICVD fell within the domain of the federal government as stands established hereinabove," said the order.

The court observed that NICH was separated from JPMC in the year 1990 and made an attached department of the Federal Ministry of Health, thereby satisfying the first limb of Entry No.16 supra of being a federal agency/institute.

While NICH has hospital facilities, it is an established fact that it is also a teaching/training institute offering various degrees/diplomas including FCPS, MCPS, nursing programmes and paramedical courses.

Furthermore, NICH also has facilities for clinical research, resulting in the production of numerous research papers in the relevant field. Like JPMC and NICVD, these aspects as a whole bring NICH within the purview of the second limb of Entry No.16 supra.

The court observed that it is an undisputed fact that prior to the purported transfer/devolution, NMP was a museum controlled/financed by the Federation and therefore squarely falls within the ambit of Entry No.15.

The court observed that it is manifest from the objectives/functions stated in resolution dated 29.05.1986 vide which SPZMI was established that SZPMI has a predominant research/training aspect which was far from ancillary or incidental to the functioning of Sheikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore and therefore, the court is in no manner of doubt that SZPMI falls within Entry No.16.

"We are of the view that the institutions were purportedly transferred/devolved onto the province of Sindh by the federal government pursuant to the 18th Amendment," said the detailed judgment.

The court held that the implementation commission could only act in terms of clauses (8) and (9) of Article 270AA of the Constitution and since it failed to satisfy itself that none of the institutions were covered by the entries contained in the Concurrent Legislative List (as omitted by the 18th Amendment), therefore such Institutions could not have been devolved, consequently the purported transfer/devolution was unconstitutional and unlawful.

The court further held that JPMC, NICVD, NICH and SZPMI fell within the ambit of Entry No.16 of the Federal Legislative List while NMP fell within the purview of Entry No. 15 thereof and were therefore within the exclusive federal domain and could not have been transferred/devolved upon the province of Sindh.

"The transfer of SZPMI was also unlawful for the reason that it was done by the prime minister and not the federal cabinet as defined by Mustafa Impex’s case," the court observed.

It noted that JSMU may also make arrangements to enter into a public-public or private-private or public-private partnership as per Regulations 9(5) and 14 of the Recognition, Eligibility Criteria for Enhancement in Annual Admissions and Accreditation Standards) Regulations, 2018.

The court held that arrangements may be agreed upon with JPMC and NICH in order to ensure that the status of JSMU is prevented from falling foul of PMDC’s regulations. The court granted six-month grace period to JSMU during which the past arrangement vis-à-vis the faculty shall continue.

If required, the court directed that JSMU shall ensure compliance with the faculty requirements as set out in the 2018 Regulations either by hiring separate full-time faculty for SMC on JSMU’s payroll; or JSMU negotiates with the Federal Government to allow the employees of JPMC and NICH to continue to be employed as the teaching staff at JSMU while holding a lien on their respective posts in the federal government.

"The federal government, the provincial government and JSMU shall mutually agree on the workable methodology to retain and preserve the status of JSMU," the detailed verdict concluded.


----------



## ghazi52

The performance of Pakistani judiciary is abysmal and taking a nose dive.
At least one case is pending since 1956 and many others are pending for more than 10 years.
There were 1.77 Million cases pending in 2014. As of 2018 there are 2.2 Million Pending cases and on the rise.
What the head of the Institution, the Chief Justice is doing about it?
Statistics speak for themselves, and these were published by the Law and Justice commission of Pakistan.


----------



## ghazi52

*Law, procedure, grounds: Factors before SC for granting army chief an extension*







ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said there were three points which the court will consider on the issue of extension to the tenure of Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa: the law, procedure involved, and grounds for granting an extension.

The court took a strong exception to the government’s move for coming up with different versions while moving a fresh summary notifying extension in service to General Bajwa. A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and comprising Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah heard a petition challenging the extension of COAS General Qamar Bajwa.

The chief justice at the outset made it clear that the court is hearing a petition and it has not taken suo motu notice. Former law minister Farogh Naseem also came to the court for representing the COAS. The court noted that the prime minister had requested a reappointment whereas the president had issued a notification for extension in the army chief's tenure. The "Army officers are respectable but the Law Ministry, with its erroneous documentation, has attempted to disrespect them," said the chief justice. The court on Tuesday had suspended operation of the federal government notification for extension in service to COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa.

The court had noted that in the case in hand, the prime minister had himself passed an order appointing the current COAS for a second term in that office on 19.08.2019, whereas under Article 243 of the Constitution, it is the president who is the appointing authority for that office. General Qamar Bajwa is set to retire on November 29 upon completion of his three-year term. The government on August 19 had notified reappointment of General Bajwa, extending his tenure by three years citing “regional security environment.” After the court suspended the earlier notification, the federal cabinet later after amending Rule 255 of the Army Regulation in an emergency meeting approved a new summary for extension in the tenure of General Bajwa and dispatched it to the president for approval. “Even a summary for the appointment of an assistant commissioner is not issued the way you have issued a summary for extension in service to the army chief,” the chief justice asked Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan that resulted in a laughter in the courtroom.

The chief justice said the prime minister, president, judges, speaker National Assembly, attorney general and Auditor General of Pakistan are constitutional offices. “At least one should have read the summary before issuing,” the CJP remarked and wondered as to why nobody even bothered to go through the summary before issuing it. “Two meetings were held and we hoped that big minds assembled there would present some good, but we have been thoroughly disappointed,” the CJP remarked. “Whosoever had done this, check out their educational degrees,” the CJP asked the attorney general in a lighter tone. “But Attorney General we sympathise with you”, the CJP said.

The Justice Khosa said that there are three issues: one, whether the issue has any legal backing, second if the procedure and process was adopted as per law, and thirdly the reasons for appointment. “But for us only the first two are very much important therefore we have to decide it in accordance with law while you will have to take decision in this regard,” the Chief Justice asked the attorney general.

The chief justice further observed that this is a court of law, adding that personalities don’t matter to them, only institutions do. “If everything was done in accordance with law than we would have no issue, but if it is done illegally, we have to protect the law and Constitution,” the chief justice remarked, adding that they have taken the oath to protect the Constitution and hence they are answerable to Almighty Allah.

Earlier, at the outset of the hearing, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah questioned as to how an army chief can be reappointed to the office when he is no longer part of the staff.

The attorney general replied that the army chief cannot be considered retired until he hands over command to another general. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah observed that Article 243 of the Constitution talks about the appointment of an officer, and questioned whether it also refers to period of appointment as well?" "Where does it say that it is a three-year term (for an extension)?" asked Justice Shah.

The attorney general admitted that the period of the tenure is not specified in the rules. However, he said that there is no bar in the Constitution over the extension in service to the army chief. The chief justice said the matter is very important, adding that in the past, five or six generals granted themselves with extensions, however, nobody noticed it, but now it has come to the court and they are looking into it and will settle the parameters so that it does not happen in the future.

The attorney general while citing Article 146 of the Army Act submitted that officials can be granted an extension of two months in case of a war. The chief justice said that as per law, the army chief can stop officers’ retirements in times of war, but here the government wants to stop the army chief’s retirement. The chief justice observed that section 255 of the Army Regulation amended by the government did not concern the army chief. He pointed out to the attorney general the amendment made by the government in the said section which relates to officials either retired or expelled from their services.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asked the AG as to whether a retired general can be appointed as the army chief. The AG however, replied that the reappointment and tenure are decided under the 1947 convention. The Chief Justice said there is no need of a convention when laws are available, adding that when the law is silent on anything, convention follows. “We have a written Constitution, while the British constitution is based on conventions,” the CJP said. The AG replied that law is silent over the tenure that’s why he referred to convention.

The chief justice asked the attorney general to read out chapters of the Army Act, so that they could have a clear and whole picture to understand the rules. The attorney general went through various sections of the Army Act. He also clarified while referring to the army rules on Tuesday. He submitted that the court wrote 'law' in its order. The CJP observed that the court had given its order after looking at the documents presented by the AG. "The attorney general says that a general never retires," remarked the chief justice. "The attorney general has interpreted Article 243 according to which even he can be made an army chief."

The chief justice told the attorney general that the president had not issued the notification on the prime minister's advice. He told the attorney general that the court was giving him one day to come up with a solution to the problem. He said if the mistakes are repeated then the court will have no other option, but to nullify the appointment "You have made the army chief a shuttlecock," said Justice Khosa. "There is still time. The government should step back and assess what it is doing," the chief justice remarked. "They should not do something like this with a high-ranking officer."

The chief justice on one point read out the oath of Army officers, saying they would lay down their lives if needed for the defence of the country. “I will also not get involved in any political matters, very good,” the CJP remarked while further reading the oath of army officer.

Meanwhile, the court asked Barrister Farogh Naseem to arrange a lawyer so that he could argue on behalf of the COAS. The chief justice asked Farogh Naseem to settle his issue with the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) pertaining to his law practicing licence which has been suspended by the Council. The Vice Chairman Pakistan Bar Council, Syed Amjad Shah, along with his other companions and members of the Council was present in the courtroom right from the start of the proceedings. He told the court that Farogh Naseem could not argue before the court as it has suspended his licence.

Farogh Naseem submitted before the court that the attorney general had already suspended the order of the Pakistan Bar Council. The chief justice asked Farogh Naseem that in order to avoid any difficulty during the proceedings, he should arrange his associate so that he could argue on his behalf. “You can be allowed to stand with your associate on the rostrum during his arguments before the court,” the CJP told Farogh Naseem. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing for today (Thursday).


----------



## ghazi52

*Gen Bajwa to stay on as COAS for 6 more months: SC*
Naveed Siddiqui | Haseeb Bhatti

November 28, 2019







Army Chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa was previously due to retire at midnight. 
The Supreme Court on Thursday in its short order announced that Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa will remain the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) for another six months, during which the parliament will legislate on the extension/reappointment of an Army chief.

A three-member bench — comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa, Justice Mian Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah — announced the much-anticipated verdict after being assured by the government that parliament will pass legislation within six months.

According to the short order, the federal government "has presented this court with a recent summary approved by the president on the advice of the prime minister along with a notification dated 28.11.2019 which shows that General Qamar Javed Bajwa has been appointed as COAS under Article 243(4)(b) of the Constitution with effect from 28.11.2019".

"The current appointment of General Qamar Javed Bajwa as COAS shall be subject to the said legislation and shall continue for a period of six months from today, whereafter the new legislation shall determine his tenure and other terms and conditions of service," read the court order.

The verdict was announced around 3:45pm, prior to which the court had asked the government to submit the following:


an undertaking that the parliament will pass legislation in this regard within six months
an amended notification
The amendments to the notification included the elimination of:


the mention of the Supreme Court
duration of the Army chief's tenure
the description of Army chief's salary and incentives
The top court's ruling comes in the nick of time as Gen Bajwa was set to retire at midnight. Prime Minister Imran Khan had extended Bajwa's tenure through a notification in August, but the top court suspended it on November 26 due to irregularities in the manner of extension.


*'Attorney general failed to point to any existing law'*

The court, while pronouncing the decision today, said that the government has been given six months to legislate on the duration of service of an Army chief.

It said that Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan has "categorically assured the Court" that the federal government "shall initiate the process to carry out the necessary legislation in this regard and seeks a period of six months for getting the needful done".

"We, while exercising judicial restraint, find it appropriate to leave the matter to the Parliament and the Federal Government to clearly specify the terms and conditions of service of the COAS through an Act of Parliament and to clarify the scope of Article 243 of the Constitution in this regard," read the court's short order.

The order observed that the matter of the Army chief's reappointment or extension had been challenged before the court. It also observed that in the three days of proceedings that followed, the government kept changing its stance, interchangeably "referring to it as reappointment, limiting of retirement or extension of tenure".

The SC observed that the government had been relying on Article 243(4)(b) of the 1973 Constitution and Regulation 255 of the Army Regulations (Rules), 1998. The court observed that when it asked questions pertaining to the Army chief's appointment, duration of service and extension, the attorney general was unable to refer to any existing law.

The court reviewed the laws contained within Article 243 of the Constitution while deciding on the matter. "The court has thoroughly examined Article 243(4)(b)," said Chief Justice Khosa.

The short order noted that according to Article 243, the authority to appoint an Army chief lies with the president. However, there is no duration of appointment specified in the Article.

(The legality) of Gen Bajwa's appointment will rest on the government's legislation, said the court, observing that prior to this occasion, the appointments had been made as per the existing practices.

"The learned Attorney-General has taken pains to explain that the answers to these questions are based on practice being followed in the Pakistan Army but the said practice has not been codified under the law," said the court order.

*'Put your house in order'*
Before adjourning the hearing at 11:30am, the chief justice told the government's court representative Farogh Naseem that the government should submit a written statement to ensure that the parliament will legislate on the matter within six months.

"If legislation is not done within six months, the appointment will become illegal," he warned.

The chief justice observed that there was "ambiguity in the Army Act".

"Parliament has to remove that ambiguity," Justice Shah said and added: "There is no better forum than the parliament to fix the system."

Justice Miankhel said that it should also be clarified whether in the future the tenure would be extended or if there will be a reappointment.

"The legal complications that we are pointing out will cause you difficulties but do not consider this embarrassing," the chief justice said.

Justice Khosa also said to make sure that the court's mention is removed from the summary and that the summary should also make no mention of the duration of the extension.

"The parts about salary and incentives should also be removed from the summary," he said. "We want all of this to be part of the record."

Addressing AG Khan, the top judge remarked: "Put your house in order."


*Notifications of previous Army chiefs*

At the outset of the hearing at 9:30am, the bench directed AG Khan to submit the notification issued for former army chief retired Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani's extension as well as that of retired Gen Raheel Sharif's retirement to the court.

It is pertinent to mention that over the past two decades, Gen Raheel Sharif is the only Army chief to have retired on time. Gen Kayani's tenure was extended for another three years by the PPP-led government in 2010. Interestingly, the service extension given to Kayani was also challenged in the Islamabad High Court in 2012. However, it was dismissed by the bench as "non-maintainable" because Article 199 (3) of the Constitution barred the high court from hearing a case against persons subject to the Pakistan Army Act (PAA).

"Under what section was retired Gen Kayani granted an extension?" the chief justice asked during today's hearing. "We want to see what pension and perks Gen Kayani got after retirement."

Referring to the retirement of Army generals, Justice Khosa said: "If an Army general never retires, then under what rule did Raheel Sharif retire?"

"You said that generals never retire; if they don't retire, then they wouldn't be entitled to pension either," he observed. The attorney general said that he wanted to assist the court on the matter.

Justice Khosa said that the court will examine the grounds on which retired Gen Kayani was granted an extension and adjourned the hearing for 15 minutes.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan Bar Council restored the license of Farogh Naseem, who had stepped down as law minister to represent Gen Bajwa. The CJP had told him yesterday that the court did not want to waste time on a side issue and did not want to let the institution of the Army suffer. He had asked Naseem to settle the licence issue or come with an associate if he wanted to argue on behalf of the Army chief.


*CJP irked over court's mention in draft notification*

After the hearing resumed, the AG submitted the summary of the draft notification for Gen Bajwa's extension prepared by the government yesterday. Following the court's adjournment on Wednesday, an emergency meeting was called at Prime Minister House in the evening to debate the government's strategy for today's hearing. The meeting was attended by Gen Bajwa himself, along with Prime Minister Imran and several ministers.

Upon examining the summary, the CJP berated the attorney general over the mention of the Supreme Court's proceedings in the draft notification.

"Bear your own burden, why do you use our name?" Justice Khosa asked. "Do your own work, why do you drag us in the middle?"

He directed the attorney general to eliminate the mention of the court from the summary, saying: "The court's name has been used so we cannot even point out what's wrong."

He raised questions over the appointment of the Army chief, noting that the post was already occupied by Gen Bajwa.

"How can an appointment be made on a position that is already occupied?" the chief justice asked.

It seems like this time a lot of thought has been put into drafting the notification, the chief justice remarked. "Take out the part about the court's advice," Justice Khosa directed the attorney general. "If the president seeks our advice, that is a different matter."

Referring to the Army chief's participation in yesterday's meeting, Justice Khosa said: "It is embarrassing that the Army chief has to keep an eye on summaries instead of the country's defence."


*Loophole in laws*

Justice Shah noted once again that the law does not mention that the duration of the tenure is three years.

The chief justice noted that the summary had mentioned that the Army chief's tenure will be three years. He said that Article 243 does not mention the three-year duration.

"If they find an extraordinary general tomorrow, will they grant him an extension of 30 years?" he remarked and stressed that there should be a clear system that everyone is aware of. He said that the three-year appointment will "become an example".

"The government may want to appoint the next Army chief for one year," he commented.

The chief justice regretted that no one had examined the law while extensions were being granted all these years.

"There is no check on the activities that are going on in cantonment or under which law an action is being taken," he said.

"Now a constitutional institution is examining this matter."

He said that the process of appointment on a constitutional post should be clear and asked AG Khan how long it would take for the government to draft laws in this regard. The attorney general told the bench that the government will require three months, adding that a separate law will be drafted in relation to the Army chief.

Justice Shah, in his remarks, said that yesterday the bench had said that generals retire but the attorney general had insisted that they don't.

"The summary neither mentions the Army chief's salary nor the perks he is receiving," Justice Shah pointed out. "The attorney general too must have read the laws regarding the Army for the first time."

"We are not telling you to pass legislation straight away," Justice Khosa said. "A law that has not been drafted in 72 years cannot be made in a hurry."

He added that the government had "reverted to the Constitution for the first time".

"When a decision is taken in accordance with the Constitution, our hands are tied," the CJP said.

"We were labelled as agents of India and the CIA when we examined the Army Act yesterday," the chief justice regretted. AG Khan told him that India "took a lot of advantage" of yesterday's arguments.

"It is our right to ask questions," the CJP declared. The attorney general lamented that "social media was not under anyone's control".

Justice Shah asked the AG to "suggest how to fix laws regarding the Army".


*Govt fails to satisfy court*

On Wednesday, the chief justice before adjourning the hearing, said that there were three points which the court will consider:


the law
the procedure involved
the grounds for granting the Army chief an extension
He had said that the first two issues are very important and based on those, the court will announce its decision. Gen Bajwa will be able to continue his service if the Supreme Court decides the case in his favour before November 29.

During yesterday's hearing, the bench was irked by the fact that after Tuesday’s cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Imran Khan submitted a summary to President Arif Alvi for approval to "reappoint" the Army chief on his retirement and the new appointment was made under Article 243(4) of the Constitution, but the notification later issued pertains to the "grant of extension" to the COAS for another term of three years.

The attorney general chalked the gaffe up to "clerical errors" by the ministry.

"No one even bothered to read what they are issuing," Justice Khosa observed, regretting the way the law ministry dealt with the issue.

"Please settle the matter by Thursday because you have only one day or the time will be over and the court will decide in accordance with the Constitution and the law," the chief justice said, highlighting the need for urgency in view of COAS' fast-approaching retirement. “You have amended Regulation 255 of the Army rules in Tuesday’s cabinet meeting when it does not deal with the appointment of the Army chief but that of other officers,” he observed.

Recalling that several generals in the past had granted themselves extension, the court observed that it was necessary to settle the service matters of the Army chief for all times to come.

“Personalities don’t matter to us since it is a court of law,” the CJP said, explaining that the court would be satisfied if everything was done in a legal manner. To understand the scheme of the service structure, the court also asked the AG to read one by one the entire provisions of the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 as well as the Army rules and regulations.

*Suspension of notification*

In an unanticipated development on Tuesday, CJP Khosa had suspended the federal government's notification of Gen Bajwa's extension and issued notices to the Army chief, defence ministry and the federal government.

The Supreme Court said the AG could not refer to any provision in any legal instrument regarding extension in service of the Army chief upon completion of his first term for his re-appointment.


----------



## ghazi52

*Law ministry notifies appointment of Justice Gulzar Ahmed as new CJP*
Inamullah Khattak
December 04, 2019







Justice Gulzar Ahmed will take oath of office as Chief Justice of Pakistan on December 21. — PID/File
The law ministry on Wednesday notified the appointment of Justice Gulzar Ahmed as the new Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Justice Gulzar will take charge as the country's chief justice on December 21, a day after the retirement of Justice Asif Saeed Khosa.

The appointment was approved by President Arif Alvi.

Justice Ahmed was born on February 2, 1957, in Karachi to the family of Noor Muhammad, a distinguished lawyer. His elementary schooling was from the city's Gulistan School, according to the Supreme Court website. He then went on to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree from Government National College, Karachi after which he obtained his law degree from S.M. Law College, Karachi.

He enrolled as an advocate on January 18, 1986, and joined the High Court on April 4, 1988. Subsequently, he became an advocate of the Supreme Court on September 15, 2001.

Justice Ahmed was elected honorary secretary of the Sindh High Court Bar Association in Karachi for the year 1999-2000.

Throughout his legal practice, he mostly remained on the civil-corporate side, serving as the legal advisor to numerous multinational and local companies, banks and financial institutions.


----------



## ghazi52

*Judge video scandal case: IHC mandated to announce its decision, says SC*







ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday disposed of former prime minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif’s petition, seeking review of its August 23 verdict in a video scandal case involving former accountability court judge Arshad Malik.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, heard the review petition filed by Advocate Khawaja Harris on behalf of Nawaz Sharif.

Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa observed that the apex court’s remarks will not influence proceedings of the video scandal case currently being heard by the Islamabad High Court (IHC). He said the earlier judgment stated that the high court was empowered to make its own decision without being influenced by the apex court’s verdict. He observed that Nawaz Sharif’s counsel Khawaja Haris’ arguments were repetitive, as the Supreme Court had already debated and decided on them in the August 23 verdict.

Justice Khosa further remarked that an impression was being created that the IHC’s powers were restricted. “This happens when the judgment is not thoroughly read,” he added. The chief justice said the IHC was mandated to announce its decision in the video scandal case.


----------



## ghazi52

Prime Minister Imran Khan present at the ceremony as Justice Gulzar Ahmed takes oath as 27th Chief Justice of Pakistan..


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs to verify PIA employees' degrees*







https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/web-desk
December 31, 2019


Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday has directed to verify the degrees of employees working in Pakistan International Airlines (PIA).

During the hearing, the plaintiff claimed that the officials have received their academic degrees without even going to the private university in Azad Kashmir.

Responding to the arguments, the court remarked apparently, it looks like that the degrees have been awarded through some illegal process.

Subsequently, the apex court while ordering to check the degrees has adjourned the hearing for one month. 

Earlier, PIA had sacked 50 cabin crew members and three pilots for holding fake degrees. The spokesperson of the airlines said that the action was taken on the instructions of the Supreme Court.

An interim report was submitted to the bench by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

The top court had also directed the authorities concerned to complete the process of degree verification and submit the final report on the matter


----------



## ghazi52

*Illegal deals done at airports, nobody to stop them: Justice Gulzar*







KARACHI: Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed on Friday reprimanded the Additional Director General Civil Aviation Authority Tanveer Ashraf over misbehaviour with passengers and insufficient facilities being provided at the airports. The CJP remarked that his job was not only to take benefits and salary, adding that foreign currency, drugs and other smuggled items were being transported from the airports. He said illegal deals were being done at airports but nobody was there to stop them and all the airports had become dangerous places. 

The Supreme Court took an exception to lack of regulatory control of the Civil Aviation Authority at airports and directed director general CAA to submit details as to what facilities as well as compensation were provided to passengers in case of cancellation or delayed flights by the airlines.

Hearing a suo moto case with regard to inconvenience to passengers in baggage handling at airports and delayed and cancellation of flights, the SC’s three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, directed theCivil Aviation Authority to file comments on action taken against airlines for delayed or cancelled flights at airports.

The court took notice over reports of drugs and foreign currency smuggling at airports and inquired from the CAA officer as to why video recordings of close circuit cameras were not available after such incidents.

The court observed that an organised racket was operating at airports, which used to remove the close circuit camera recordings to hush up the smuggling of foreign currency, narcotics cases and make deal with the culprits. The court observed that airports had become dangerous places where dealing of foreign currencies and drug smuggling have been taken place and the future of the country was decided.

The court directed the CAA to submit reports as to how many incidents on airports have been reported with regard to complaints of passengers to the authority and what action had been taken on such complaints. The court directed the director general CAA, along with additional DG, to appear before the court on the next date of hearing.

The court took notice over non-appearance of director general CAA before the court and inquired from the CAA’s director as to why DG CAA or concerned officer having conversant with court directives did not appear before the court. The CAA’s director submitted that the DG was not nominated yet and the authority was being looked after by the secretary aviation.

Justice Gulzar inquired from the CAA officer as to what facilities were being provided to the passengers in case of delay or cancellation of flights and whether they were compensated and properly accommodated by the airlines. The court observed that passengers used to sit on the floor and not being properly looked after at the airports in case of cancellation or hour-long delays in flights. The court observed that people used to travel through aircraft to save their time and their purpose fail when flights are delayed or cancelled.

The CAA officer submitted that accommodation facilities had been provided at the New Islamabad Airport whereas necessary instructions have been issued to the airport managers for providing facilities to the passengers.

The court questioned the structure of the New Islamabad Airport and observed that despite the government paid 10 times more cost of the airport, it could collapse any day.

The court observed that the CAA and other agencies working at airports have to facilitate the passengers and directed the acting DG CAA to appear before the court after the break.

Acting DG CAA Tanvir Ashraf Bhatti later on appeared before the court and submitted that he was not aware about the notice of the court and sought time to file details of information with regard to facilities being provided to the passengers in case of delay or cancellation of flights. He submitted that some flights were delayed due to harsh weather conditions but directions of the court had been complied with.

The court took an exception to non-compliance of the court directives and observed that the same would amount to contempt of court and concerned officer could be sent home for disobeying the court order.

The court directed the CAA to file report as what action had been taken against officials of airlines for delayed and cancelled flights and submit report.

The court directed the Civil Aviation Authority to submit details with regard to maintenance of the airports as well as operations of other agencies, including Customs, Airport Security Force and Federal Investigation Agency to maintain the security of airports.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court directs govt to explain how lawyer's detention is related to national security*
January 13, 2020







On Saturday, the federal government had challenged the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi bench ruling on Inamur Rahim's arrest in the Supreme Court. — AFP/File
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the federal government to submit a written reply and explain how the case regarding the detention of Advocate Inamur Rahim — a retired colonel who was picked up from his home in Rawalpindi on Dec 17, 2019 — is connected to national security.

Taking up the federal government's petition against the Lahore High Court order for Rahim's release, the apex court asked the government's counsel to explain the national security issue his case relates to, on the basis of which, it should be heard inside the judges' chambers.

Earlier, the court had directed the federal government to present the detained advocate in court following which Attorney General of Pakistan Anwar Masood Khan requested that the court review the order to present Rahim and also requested that the case be heard inside the judges' chambers.

"We have no objections but show us the matter on the basis of which we should do this. Show us the documents, we will not make them public," said Justice Mushir Alam, adding that they wanted to go through the documents to understand which national security issue this case was related to.

At the outset of today's proceedings, the top court had rejected the government's request of in-camera proceedings for the case. AG Khan had argued that the matter in question was related to national security and therefore mandated in-camera proceedings.

Resuming proceedings after a break, the apex court directed the federal government to submit a written reply and ordered that the detained lawyer be presented in court by tomorrow.

"We all know what matter of national security it is. Rahim had presented copies of the Army Act in court," alleged Supreme Court Bar Association Qalbe Hussain while addressing the judges.

Justice Alam said that the LHC had issued a short order and it seemed that a detailed verdict had not yet been issued, adding that the government should wait for the detailed verdict.

In response, the attorney general asked for the short order to be suspended while the SC heard this petition, vowing to present the detained lawyer in court. Later, the attorney general presented a report regarding Rahim's arrest in a sealed envelope.

"Whatever is written in this report has been published. Don't dramatise things," responded Justice Alam.

The proceedings were adjourned till Tuesday.

*Rahim's detention 'illegal'*
On Thursday, the LHC's Rawalpindi bench had declared the detention of Rahim to be illegal and ordered military authorities to release him immediately.

Following this, the federal government on Saturday approached the Supreme Court to challenge the ruling.

The defence and interior secretaries in an appeal filed through Additional Attorney General Sajid Ilyas Bhatti had sought suspension of the LHC's release order till the present case was decided by the apex court.

*Rahim – the advocate for missing persons*
On Dec 17, 2019, Rahim's son Hasnain Inam said eight to 10 people in black uniforms with a Pakistani flag stitched on their arms forced their way into their house located on Rawalpindi's Adiala Road.

He added that he was overpowered after being pushed away by two people, and one person put his hand over his mouth. "The men then searched every room and forced [my father] into a pick-up truck at gunpoint and drove away," he said.

On Jan 2, the defence ministry informed the LHC that Rahim was in the custody of its subordinate agency and that he was being probed for allegedly violating the Official Secret Act after the court sought a reply on a petition filed by the defence and interior ministries.

However, a representative for the defence ministry did not specify exactly what violations had been committed by the detained lawyer.

Rahim has previously filed numerous petitions for the recovery of missing persons and against administrative orders of the army or armed forces. Moreover, he was the counsel in petitions filed against high-profile court-martial proceedings about the GHQ attack and conviction of naval officers among others.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC rejects PIA CEO’s appeal to continue working, questions appointment of 10 PAF officers*
Haseeb Bhatti
January 21, 2020








PIA CEO Arshad Malik had filed a petition against SHC directions restraining him from working. 

The Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday Air Marshal Arshad Malik’s appeal to remain the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) while raising suspicions on increased fares and appointment of ten officers of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) in the national carrier.

The three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, called into question the appointments of four air vice marshals, two air commodores, three wing commanders and one flight lieutenant in the national airline.

"How can Arshad Malik make such appointments when he himself is appointed on deputation?" questioned the top judge.

The bench also noted that another case pertaining to the PIA chief's appointment was already being heard in the Supreme Court.

Malik had filed a petition in the Supreme Court, requesting for a stay order against a Sindh High Court order, which restrained him from working as PIA's CEO.

During the hearing today, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, who was part of the bench hearing the case, said: "We want to see if the advertisement of PIA CEO's post was designed with Arshad Malik in mind as he does not have the pre-requisite qualification, education or the expertise required for the job."

Justice Shah also raised concerns over reports that a bid worth Rs70 million was awarded to an air commodore and said that the "fares of PIA had increased by 100 per cent" since Malik's appointment.

"You are running the national airline's affairs like those of a family business […] How can you manage PIA when you failed Shaheen Airways miserably?" he remarked.

The Supreme Court rejected Malik's plea and handed the reins of PIA to the board of governors. The bench summoned the record of the case which is currently being heard in the SHC and adjourned the hearing until two weeks.


*Malik's appointment challenged in SHC*

A petition challenging Malik's appointment was filed in the Sindh High Court by Safdar Anjum, the general secretary of one of the associations of PIA senior staff/employee. Anjum insisted that he was filing the petition for the enforcement of fundamental rights of all members of the association and the general public since the PIA was a national asset.

Impleading the PIA CEO, the federation through principal secretary to the prime minister, secretaries of the cabinet and aviation divisions, PIA and others as respondents, the petitioner stated that Air Marshal Malik was a senior serving officer of the PAF whose appointment as the PIA chief was made in utter disregard of rules laid down by the apex court in its August 3, 2018 judgement against the appointment of the then CEO.

He maintained that the appointment was also made in violation of the Public Sector Companies (Corporate Governance) Rules of 2013 and Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines of 2015 as both the laws were applicable to the PIA.

The lawyer for the petitioner told the bench that the main respondent was holding a basic BSc degree and seemed to have acquired qualifications in war studies.

He added that clearly Malik lacked any qualifications, experience in the commercial airline industry or operating a commercial fleet under the civil aviation rules and international treaties.


----------



## ghazi52

*'You should have resigned after train tragedy,' CJP tells Sheikh Rashid*

January 28, 2020








Federal Minister for Railways Sheikh Rashid speaks to media following the Supreme Court hearing. — 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered Federal Minister for Railways Sheikh Rashid to submit in court a business plan to uplift Pakistan Railways from its current condition, giving the minister two weeks time to do so.

While hearing a case pertaining to losses incurred by the national organisation, a three-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah expressed displeasure with the railways minister over his running of the organisation.

The chief justice asked the railways minister to inform the court about an October 2019 fire that had engulfed a train, killing 73 passengers when apparently a gas cylinder brought by one of the travellers had exploded.

"You should have submitted your resignation," said the top judge, in response to which Rashid said that 75 people had been dismissed after the tragic incident.

"Yesterday we were told that two people were fired. You fired lower-level employees, when will the higher-ranking ones be [dismissed]?" asked Justice Ahmed.

"We will also remove higher-level employees," said Rashid in response.

"We do not see this happening, you are the highest-ranking employee," remarked the chief justice, adding: "Minister _Sahib_ don't show people dreams, today you are running an 18th century railways. There is plundering in the railways department."

In response, the federal minister said he had been working 18 hours a day and had increased railways' passengers by seven million.

"Even in 2020, your entire system is being run on _parchis_ (favours)," the chief justice remarked.

A day earlier, the apex court had observed that no department in the country was more corrupt than Pakistan Railways and summoned Rashid, the railways secretary and its chief operating officer to answer the court's questions today.

During today's proceedings, the chief justice said: "Yes, Mr _Sahib_ [Rashid], tell us what you are doing. Your whole story is in front of us. The railways will not function under your administration."

Additionally, the court said ideally revenue from railways should take the ministry out of debt and make it profitable. The three-judge bench asked Rashid to present a business plan in the next hearing, adding that if there was any deviation from the plan presented in court, action will be taken.

The court also ordered that the six-kilometre portion of the Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) be completed in two weeks and instructed the Sindh government to provide all assistance on the project.

Adjourning proceedings till February 12, the court summoned the minister and the secretary of planning in the next hearing.

Speaking to reporters outside the court, Rashid said he will take the railways forward as per the instructions of the chief justice.

Rashid also clarified that the audit report referred to in the Supreme Court earlier was an audit report from 2013-17, adding that their report has not yet been released.

"When our audit report is released, then we are answerable. This is the audit report of the previous government," he said.


----------



## AZ1

By this logic who should resign after not giving justice to lahore model town case and all?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*'What is happening in Karachi? It was once the jewel of Pakistan,' laments CJP*

February 06, 2020







Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed on Thursday took various officials to task for the condition of Karachi while hearing a case regarding the removal of encroachments in the metropolis and renewing the original face of the city. — PID/File
The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the removal of the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) Director General Zafar Ahsan while hearing a case regarding the removal of encroachments in Karachi and restoring the original face of the city.

The court said that an "honest officer" should be appointed, adding that the Sindh chief secretary look into the matter personally and take legal action against officials who are found to be involved in corrupt practices. He also directed authorities to remove encroachments in Karachi within a week.

While issuing the order, the court expelled SBCA Director (research) Mushtaq Soomro from the courtroom.

"No one is allowed to exploit citizens," the court declared.

"This department of yours is very corrupt," the court said to the Sindh advocate general.

"I admit, but there are some honest officials as well," the advocate general replied.

A three-member bench of the apex court comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah had taken up miscellaneous petitions in the Supreme Court's Karachi registry.

During the proceedings, Justice Shah noted that "portions are being built after openly taking bribes, in every street, every block of Nazimabad".

"Construction is being done while government-owned cars are parked [outside]," he added.

"This is the total destruction of the city of Karachi," the chief justice remarked.

The court also directed that petrol pumps and other structures built on the drain on Shahrah-i-Quaideen be removed.


*Karachi a mess*

At the outset of the hearing, Chief Justice Ahmed had taken various officials to task for the condition of Karachi's infrastructure while hearing a case regarding the removal of encroachments in the metropolis and restoring the original face of the city.

During the proceedings, the top judge asked for the reason behind the situation in Karachi and said: "This is not some village, at one point Karachi used to the jewel of Pakistan.

"What a mess you have created in your self-serving interests. Entire parks, graveyards and residential plots have vanished.

"You want to run Karachi, then run it and show us."

The top judge asked Sindh Advocate General Salman Talibuddin if various illegal constructions in the city had been removed.

"Tell us, what is the situation of parks and playgrounds?" Justice Ahmed inquired.

He told the advocate general to read Article 140 of the Constitution, which reads: _"Each Province shall, by law, establish a local government system and devolve political, administrative and financial responsibility and authority to the elected representatives of the local governments."_

"Doesn't this article apply to Sindh?" he asked.

Throughout the proceedings, the various officials continued to trade blame. The provincial chief secretary told the court that the Sindh government had given most of the authority to the Karachi mayor.

"The mayor is wrong in saying he has no authority," the chief secretary said.

The top judge inquired about various aspects of the city's infrastructure including the sewerage system.

"All the money goes in your pockets," the top judge expressed his displeasure, asking if any money is spent of Karachi's citizens.

"Don't be a master in front of us, you are an employee of Pakistan," Justice Ahmed told the chief secretary.

"You people wear a suit and sit in an office. Tell us this, what street did you visit last," he said adding: "Tell us why you people don't make the city beautiful."

Taking Karachi Mayor Wasim Akhtar to the task, the top judge asked Akhtar if he had constructed any roads.

Responding to this, Akhtar said they had made small streets in the Nazimabad area of the city.

"There are no small lanes there, present a record of how many roads you have made," the top judge said and asked him to tell the court what he had done for the city.

Addressing the municipalities secretary, Justice Ahmed said: "You may be someone's favourite but there are no favourites here."

The court also asked the police about their strategy for removing encroachments, in response to which Additional IG Ghulam Nabi Memon said their job was to provide security.


*Delay in KCR revival*

Meanwhile, taking up a case regarding the revival of the local train and tram service, the court admonished both provincial and federal government officials for their failure to revive the Karachi Circular Railway (KCR).

At the outset, Justice Ahmed inquired if the court's order from last year to revive the KCR had been acted upon.

Various officials, including former Railways secretary Sikandar Sultan Raja, Commissioner Karachi Iftikhar Shallwani, Karachi Mayor Wasim Akhtar, and Sindh Advocate General Salman Talibuddin, appeared before the court.

During the proceedings, the provincial advocate general read out the apex court's earlier order in which the top court had directed that the circular and local train services be restored within a month.

Talibuddin said that they had provided a briefing in this regard, adding that the project had now been included in the China Pakistan Economic Corridor.

"We have completed the framework and sent it to the federal government three times," he said.

Meanwhile, the railways secretary said that they were not delaying the project; in fact, they were completing their responsibility.

"The government doesn't want that the circular railway is revived," remarked Justice Ahmed, adding: "Now we will issue a contempt of court notice to the Sindh chief minister and railways secretary. Let's also issue a contempt notice to the Karachi mayor and Karachi commissioner.

"Come with me, I'll show you how the work is done. You people don't want to fulfil your responsibility," the chief justice said.

The provincial advocate general said that the secretary was presenting an incorrect statement, adding that the removal of encroachments and handing over the land to the Sindh government was the responsibility of the Railways ministry.

"You people are [only looking at] your political agenda, due to political affiliations you are not doing this," the top judge remarked.

He reprimanded the railways secretary saying that instead of droning on with stories, the official should tell the court why the KCR was not operating.

"This will not work, just tell us why the KCR is not functioning," he said.

Meanwhile, the various officials involved continued to trade blame with the railways secretary alleging that the Sindh government was the hindrance.

"Is this the Sindh government's responsibility?" the court inquired, in response to which the railways secretary said that as per an agreement it was not the responsibility of the provincial government.

"Should we call the Sindh chief minister and ask him whose responsibility this is?" the court asked, asking the official: "You tell us, have you given the circular railway land to the Sindh government?"

The court expressed its displeasure, saying that at the time that the order was passed by the apex court, all the information was available. "You didn't know these problems?"

"If you accuse one another, nothing will happen," the judge said, adding that meetings had been ongoing for years yet no solution had been found.

During the proceedings, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui told the court that 6,500 people had been made homeless, yet big plazas in the city were not being demolished.

"Big, big buildings have been made on railways land, go demolish them," Justice Ahmed remarked.

The hearing was briefly adjourned as the court sought a copy of the Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) report that the KCR had been handed over to the Sindh government.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC orders Sindh govt to pay Rs1 mn as compensation for Amal Umer's death*
Haseeb Bhatti | Nasir Iqbal
February 11, 2020






Amal Umer died after being shot in an 'encounter' between police and suspected robbers. — Beenish Umer/File
The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday wrapped up the suo motu case on Amal Umar's death and ordered the Sindh government to pay Rs500,000 to the child's family while also donating an additional Rs500,000 to the Rah-e-Amal Trust established by the victim's parents.

A three-judge Supreme Court bench being headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah were hearing a suo motu case regarding 10-year-old Amal's death.

The Sindh government had initially offered to pay Rs500,000 as compensation to Amal's parents, but the top court ordered the authorities to pay an additional amount of Rs500,000 to the trust established in the deceased's name.

"The amount of the compensation money needs to be reasonable," the chief justice observed, despite Sindh Additional Advocate General Sibtain Mahmood's argument that there were no legal provisions for the government to grant such a huge compensation.

“This is the highest ever compensation money being paid to the victim family on the orders of the apex court,” Faisal Siddiqui, counsel for Amal's parents, told _Dawn_.

The court also ruled that the parents of the deceased will be entitled to seek further compensation or remedy for the negligence on part of the police in accordance with the law. Referring to the recommendations of the Sindh Health Care Commission, the parents were also allowed to utilise the report to seek further relief through any other proceedings under the law through the relevant forums.

The order also noted that the Sindh police have dismissed two police officers who were responsible for the shooting of the 10-year-old and that criminal cases pertaining to the incident were pending in relevant courts.

The parents of Amal, if they wish, can also join such proceedings so that the officials involved in the crime be dealt with in accordance with law.

Furthermore, the court ordered that the recommendations of the special committee, constituted by the Supreme Court in the case, be complied with by all relevant authorities.

During the proceedings, Justice Ahmed said that the "policemen did not know where to shoot and where not to shoot".

"Police mean to shoot one person but end up targetting another," he said and added that "a police official should not have a big gun" but a 9mm pistol.

He further said: "Only officers can evoke respect for police, a constable can't do that. A constable only takes orders."

"Some suitable standard operating procedures, system of intelligence gathering and proper weapons training should be in place, since the lives of the people cannot be put in risk unduly," observed Justice Ahsan.

Former chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar in 2018 had taken a suo motu notice of the killing of 10-year-old Amal, who was shot dead in August 2018 during an encounter between police and suspected robbers in Karachi.

*Amal's death and aftermath*
After she was shot, Amal's parents, who were in the car with her, took her to National Medical Centre (NMC), but the hospital told the injured girl's parents to take her to Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre or Aga Khan Hospital. NMC also refused to arrange an ambulance for Amal, who had suffered a head wound. The 10-year-old passed away after being denied medical treatment.

Her death caused an uproar across the country and questions were raised over so-called police 'encounters' and refusal by hospitals to provide medical care.

In the aftermath of her death, the Sindh cabinet last year approved the Sindh Injured Persons Compulsory Medical Treatment (Amal Umer) Act 2019, under which hospitals are bound to provide immediate treatment to any injured person without "complying with medico-legal formalities".

The law makes it compulsory for hospitals, both private and government, to provide treatment to any injured person "without any delay, on a priority basis, without complying with medico-legal formalities or demanding payment prior to the administering of compulsory medical treatment".

Under the law, police will not be allowed to "interrupt or interfere" until the person is deemed out of danger. Doctors will also not be bound to obtain consent of relatives while providing compulsory treatment.

Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah had also announced that the provincial government will set up a fund for the treatment of injured people.

The Sindh government had also informed the top court in an earlier hearing, that payment of compensation to Amal's family had been approved in line with the law. Amal's family, however, said that accepting compensation would be "shameful" for them.

Meanwhile, the Sindh police had promised the top court that regular training sessions will be arranged for police officers in order to avoid such incidents in the future.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs ML-1 railway project to be completed in 2 years, KCR in 3 months*

February 12, 2020








Minister for Planning, Development and Special Initiatives Asad Umar and Minister for Railways Sheikh Rashid Ahmed speak to the media outside the Supreme Court in Islamabad on Wednesday. 


The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday said that the ML-1 train line should be made fully functional in the next two years while the Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) project should be completed in the next three months.

A three member bench — comprising Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah — heard a case pertaining to the losses incurred by Pakistan Railways.

There will be dire consequences if the timeline given for the completion of the railway projects is not followed strictly, the court warned.

Minister for Railways Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told the court that 85 per cent of the track for KCR has been cleared.

"We carried out an operation last night as well and razed a few buildings to the ground," Rashid said, assuring the court that work was being done to make KCR functional again.

Rashid also thanked the court for taking interest in the case, "We are grateful to you, a lot of work has been done in the past 12 days," he said.

"We are grateful to you, the whole nation is grateful," Justice Gulzar said in response while adding that the KCR is a "project for the people and not one individual. We want to bring good to people."

"Do not give the KCR project to Sindh government, keep it with yourself," Justice Gulzar told Sheikh Rashid while adding that KCR will end up like the Karachi transport system.

"We were hoping to even run trams in Karachi," the chief justice said.

He also asked the railways minister why the KCR was made part of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). "We added it to CPEC because of [our] financial situation," Rashid responded.

"China will give an expensive loan for KCR," the chief justice observed.

"If railways sells off some of its land it will be able to fix its own financial situation," the chief justice said. "Selling a single property from Karachi will fix the railway's financial system. But the court has put a stay on selling these properties," Rashid responded.

Minister for Planning, Development and Special Initiatives Asad Umar, who had been summoned to present the business plan for railways to the court, said that completing the project in three months will not be possible.

"You are saying that this can't be done [...] the project will be faced with delays while people are waiting for it [to be finished]," said the chief justice while stressing that that Pakistan Railways should not let its people sleep and "order them to work."

"Sheikh _sahib_ when will the ribbon be cut for the project?" the chief justice asked about the KCR project.

"The country's financial situation is not too well at the moment. The real issue is that a large amount of funding is required for this project," Umar told the court in response.

"The Japanese people have been asking you over and over again about this project," the chief justice said to which Umar responded that the Sindh government will have to provide an answer for that.

Hearing this, the bench summoned a reply on the matter from the Sindh government in the next hearing. Umar also asked the court to tell the Sindh government to ensure action on the KCR project.

"Asad Umar, you are very respectable for us but you are not doing anything for railways," the chief justice said.

"We will present the 1,880 kilometres-long ML-1 project in front of the CDWP on March 10," Umar responded while adding that the project will also be approved by Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) on April 12," Umar told the court in response.

The court then enquired about the timeline for the completion of the project.

"From the day that it starts, the project will be finished in five years," Rashid told the court while adding that the Chinese will also be "satisfied with this project."

The hearing of the case pertaining to losses incurred by railways was adjourned for two months.

The hearing on KCR was adjourned until Feb 21; the next one will be held at the SC Karachi registry, where the railways minister and the Sindh chief secretary have been summoned.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC adjourns CEO PIA appointment case till March 11*
By Associated Press of Pakistan
March 3, 2020

The additional attorney of Pakistan requested the court that Attorney General for Pakistan, Khalid Jawed wants to appear in this case before the court.

Naeem Bukhari sought more time to submit reply in the court after consulting with Air Marshal Arshad Malik.


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned hearing of case regarding appointment of Air Marshal Arshad Malik as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) till March 11.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, the Chief Justice said that two new applications had been filed in this case.

He said that the request came from Omar Lakhani while the second request came from three Earthquake Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Authority (ERRA) officers.

The court issued notices to the respondents over Omar Lakhani's plea.

Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan asked petitioner Omar that he had to prove his claim in the petition.
The Chief Justice asked what was the relationship of ERRA and PIA?
The ERRA officers responded that their chairman also held four positions simultaneously.
The court rejected the request of the ERRA officers.

The additional attorney of Pakistan requested the court that Attorney General for Pakistan, Khalid Jawed wants to appear in this case before the court.

He said that the AGP was in London and pleaded the court to adjourn the hearing.
Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed asked Advocate Naeem Bukhari counsel for Air Marshal Arshad Malik whether he had asked his client that which position he wanted to keep with him.

Naeem Bukhari sought more time to submit reply in the court after consulting with Air Marshal Arshad Malik.

The court accepting Naeem Bukhari's reply and adjourned the hearing of the case till March 11.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC hears govt's appeals against PHC setting aside sentences of those convicted by military courts*
Haseeb Bhatti
March 09, 2020







A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, presided over the case. — Photo courtesy Supreme Court website


The Supreme Court on Monday — hearing over 70 appeals against the Peshawar High Court's (PHC) decision to acquit convicts sentenced by the military courts — directed the defence ministry to present a full record of the convicts and the charges against them.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, presided over the case. The court issued notices to the defence ministry.

In 2018, the PHC had ruled that punishments awarded to 74 convicts by military courts on charges of terrorism were wrongful and based on ill will.

A two-judge PHC bench, comprising Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth and Justice Lal Jan Khattak, had set aside the convictions on grounds of “malice in law and fact”.

In its 173-page judgement, the high court had rejected confessional statements of the convicts after highlighting flaws, also questioning whether the right to a fair trial under Article 10-A of the Constitution was extended to the convicts or not.

According to Article 10-A, a person shall be entitled to a fair trial and due process for the determination of his civil rights and obligations or in any criminal charge against him.

In Nov 2018, the apex court had stayed the high court order with a directive to the jail superintendents concerned to halt the release of the accused who had received different sentences, including death, in a number of cases.

During the hearing today, the additional attorney general said that there are over 70 cases, each which different charges. "The cases are against individuals involved in militant activities from 2004 to 2015," he said.

"The PHC did not follow the rules laid down by the SC. After the trial, about five per cent of the accused were acquitted," he contended, adding that majority of the convicts were acquitted during the investigation process.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked whether there was any other evidence apart from the accused admitting to the charges.

The additional attorney general replied that if there is a court martial, the punishment is swiftly awarded. If the accused does not confess to the crime, a trial is initiated against him, he said.

The judge stated that if the government wants a full trial, it should inform the court of the evidence against the convicts.

"Fair trial is not only limited to Article 10-A of the Constitution. The government’s case rests on the fact that the PHC solely relied on Article 10-A in its decision," he observed.

The SC directed the defence ministry to present a consolidated record of the the convicts, the nature of the crime, the case number, and the evidence collected in a chart, and and adjourned the hearing indefinitely.


----------



## ghazi52

Govt’s inability to contain COVID-19 at border irks CJP

By Hasnaat Malik: 

March 18, 2020

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Gulzar Ahmed has come down hard on the federal government over its inability to contain the novel coronavirus at the border, leading to an outbreak in the country.
According to The Express Tribune tally, the total number of COVID-19 cases stands at 287 in the country with 208 cases in Sindh while Punjab has 28, K-P reported 19, Balochistan has 16, Islamabad two, Gilgit-Baltistan 14 and none in Azad Jammu and Kashmir.
He was referring to the pilgrim influx from Iran through the Taftan border. Almost half of the Zaireen, who are kept at a largely mismanaged tent city at the border, have tested positive for the virus.

The top judge was also irked by the National Security Committee’s (NSC) request to adjourn civil cases and instruct magistrates and sessions judges to conduct hearings at prisons for three weeks. He observed that the authorities had not made arrangements to minimise the risk instead asked the judges to suspend judicial work.

The chief justice made the remarks while hearing a plea filed by Air Marshal Arshad Malik seeking a stay against Sindh High Court’s December 2019 order restraining him from working as the chief executive officer of the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA).
..................

The SHC decision came on a petition filed by the secretary general of PIA’s Senior Staff Association (Sasa). Subsequently, the PIA moved the Supreme Court against the SHC order and the top court bench – also comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah – clubbed Malik’s petition with a suo motu case pertaining to the PIA’s losses.

In today’s hearing, the apex court allowed Malik to continue working as the national carrier’s CEO after hearing arguments from Attorney General of Pakistan Khalid Javed Khan. However, the bench refused to suspend the SHC order against Malik.

It is learnt that Malik was unwilling to leave Pakistan Air Force (PAF). In the hearing the attorney general informed the bench of the officer’s competency.

In an earlier hearing, the bench had noted that the national flag carrier would need a fulltime manager and directed Malik to choose between PIA and PAF.


----------



## ghazi52

*Courts to remain functional, decides CJP Gulzar Ahmed*


MARCH 20, 2020








Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed on Thursday chaired a meeting of National Judicial Policy Making Committee (NJPMC) where it was decided against shutting countrywide courts despite rising number of coronavirus cases.


The meeting decided that the courts across the country would remain open and follow all standard operating procedures (SOPs) aimed at tackling the spread of virus. “We will not shatter the hopes of masses who look towards the judiciary for dispensing justice,” the meeting decided.


However, it said the chief justices of the high courts were authorized to take decisions on their own keeping in view the ground realities. The apex court judge Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan was appointed as the focal person to coordinate with the lower courts keeping in view the developing situation.

“The high courts will also appoint their focal persons,” the decision said adding that all high court would be bound to follow the SOPs devised to deal with the virus. Punjab Health Minister Yasmin Rashid on Thursday confirmed that 45 new coronavirus cases have been detected in the province.


Punjab Health Minister Dr Yasmin Rashid while addressing a press conference announced that overall tally of cases in Punjab has climbed to 78 after 45 more tested positive for COVID-19.

Balochistan on Thursday also reported 22 more coronavirus cases, taking Pakistan’s tally of such patients t0 377. According to Balochistan government spokesperson Liaquat Shahwani, all patients being placed in isolation centre.


A total of 252 tests of the individuals kept in Quetta quarantine centre were conducted from which 16 individuals have tested positive thus far. With the 22 new cases, the overall provincial tally has reached 45.

Meanwhile, Sindh Health Department on Thursday confirmed five more coronavirus cases in Karachi, taking the overall provincial tally to 211. The five new cases have been reported from the metropolis, increasing the total count of coronavirus positive individuals in Karachi to 61. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government on Thursday confirmed four more coronavirus cases. There are 23 confirmed COVID-19 cases in KP thus far, said provincial information minister Ajmal Wazir.


----------



## El Sidd

I request the CJP to obligate the government of Pakistan to provide essential food supply free of cost in Pakistan.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC seeks information about measures to fight Covid-19*

April 02, 2020






Details sought about training, PPE's given to medical staff, steps taken to ensure availability of ventilators and meds. — AFP

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has sought complete information from the federal and provincial governments about measures taken by them to contain the Covid-19 pandemic.

The information sought by the apex court includes details about the training imparted, protective dresses and kits given to doctors and paramedical staff and steps taken to ensure availability of ventilators, medicines and hospital beds to cope with Covid-19.

Headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, the directives were issued by a five-judge Supreme Court bench on Wednesday after it took up a challenge to exercise of suo motu powers by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) through its March 20 order of granting bail to under-trial prisoners (UTPs).

The hearing will resume on April 6, but till then the earlier directive of March 30 will apply. The order had restrained the federal and provincial governments from releasing under-trial prisoners following the outbreak of Covid-19.

The reports sought by the Supreme Court should throw light on the state of preparedness in hospitals managed by the federal government, the four provincial governments and that of Gilgit-Baltistan, as well as the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) administration, to treat Covid-19 patients.

Centre, provinces told to share details about the training imparted and protective dresses, kits given to paramedics

The court also decided to hear and determine the legality of orders issued by the IHC as well as the March 26 Sindh High Court (SHC) order of releasing UTPs, observing that prima facie these orders do not reflect the application of any law.

Syed Qalbe Hassan, who heads the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), pointed out that 500 prisoners were entering jails per day, but the prison authorities had made no arrangements for their screening.

The apex court ordered all the Inspectors General of Prisons to ensure that no prisoner entered any jail without screening for coronavirus.

In case a prison is found to have virus-infected prisoners, the jail chief will ensure that the affected inmates are quarantined.

When the SCBA president invited the court’s attention towards 108 vacancies for doctors in different prisons, the bench ordered the advocate generals of the provinces to request their governments to fill these vacancies without delay.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah regretted that police were detaining virus-infected people, but releasing those convicted of crimes.

“The answer is not to put these prisoners in the streets, but to make arrangements in jails to protect them from the spread of disease because they are dangerous criminals who put the lives of other people at risk,” the chief justice observed.

“The hunger to commit corruption on part of criminals is bigger than the hunger for food,” observed Justice Gulzar Ahmed.

The Supreme Court was also perturbed over a report that 519 UTPs were released on the basis of a press release issued on behalf of the Sindh High Court’s chief justice.

The Advocate General of Islamabad Capital Territory told the court that 224 prisoners had been released after the IHC order, but the apex court questioned what legal assistance he had rendered on the basis of which the high court issued orders to release UTPs.

The Advocate General of Punjab, Shan Gul, cited a number of LHC judgements to emphasise that inherent powers of a high court to exercise authority under Section 561-A stood eclipsed.

The court ordered all the governments to furnish latest reports about the capacity in jails, the number of UTPs, convicted as well as vulnerable prisoners and details about those who were released on bail.

_Published in Dawn, April 2nd, 2020_


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs federal government to remove Zafar Mirza as SAPM on health*

Top court gives direction during suo motu hearing on coronavirus; makes no mention of Mirza's removal in written order.


----------



## Green Arrow



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*Country fails to make any system to curb graft: Supreme Court*
April 17, 2020

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has observed that its function is to look into legal and constitutional matters but the country’s top graft buster – the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) – still brings corruption cases to this highest legal forum for adjudication.

“The SC is supposed to look into legal matters but the NAB is still bringing fraud cases to this forum. It is unfortunate that since 1947 we have not been able to devise a system to check corruption,” said the Supreme Court judge Umar Ata Bandial on Thursday.

Justice Bandial was heading a division bench – also comprising Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed –hearing a NAB plea against acquittal of two Utility Stores Corporation (USC) officials in a graft case.

NAB had filed reference against Ziaullah and Masood Alam for their alleged corruption but both the trial court and the Sindh High Court (SHC) acquitted them.

Appearing before the bench, the counsel for the accused said his clients had been exonerated.

He said the sad part about the NAB application was that the copies of the SHC verdict attached it were unauthorized. “The SHC registrar has said NAB made no request for a copy of its decision. NAB has also confirmed that the copies are fake,” he said.

NAB counsel said Section 32 of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 (NAO) – the law that governs the accountability watchdog – required modification. “The government was asked to amend Section 32 in the Asfandyar Wali case. It was about time, the government amended the provision,” he said.

He said the bureau had submitted all other records and now its record-based application should be numbered.

Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed said in this country all sort of NAB record disappeared or catches fire and nobody can later discover it. The court, however, later issued order to number the NAB petition as it adjourned hearing of the case for an indefinite period.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC creates 11-member ad hoc committee to run PMDC*
Dawn.com

April 17, 2020







PMDC employees' contempt of court petition against govt discarded. — AFP/File


The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Friday ordered for the creation of an 11-member ad hoc committee to run the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PMDC). The orders were given in a case pertaining to a petition filed by the government, seeking removal of the PMDC registrar.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan read out the short order, reserved on Wednesday, in court today.

According to the order, the committee will be headed by retired justice of the Supreme Court, Ejaz Afzal Khan.

Members of the council will include the Attorney General of Pakistan, the Surgeon General of Pakistan, vice chancellor of National University of Medical Services, vice chancellor of University of National Health Services, vice chancellor of Sindh Jinnah Medical University, vice chancellor Khyber Medical University, vice chancellor of Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Medical University, vice chancellor of Bolan Medical University and principal of de'Montmorency College of Dentistry.

The court also discarded a contempt of court application filed by PMDC employees against the government for not following the Islamabad High Court verdict of Feb 11, in which the court had restored the PMDC and set aside the presidential ordinance that had created an alternative body called the Pakistan Medical Council (PMC).

The PMDC was dissolved by a presidential ordinance promulgated on Oct 19, 2019, which paved the way for the establishment of the PMC.

On Oct 20, the Ministry of National Health Services (NHS), despite strong opposition by PMDC employees, sealed the PMDC building and announced that the services of its 220 employees had been terminated and only class four employees would be retained.

Later, the PMC was established and the building was made functional.

However, on Feb 11, IHC declared the presidential ordinance null and void and restored PMDC along with the services of the sacked employees.

Rather than implementing the decision, once again the health ministry sealed the building and stopped employees from entering it.

Later, the government filed an appeal against the IHC decision with a division bench but could not succeed in getting the decision suspended or obtaining a stay order.

On the other hand, employees filed a contempt petition against the government in IHC.

On March 30, a bench, comprising Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiyani, while hearing the contempt plea in the IHC gave one hour to the government to open the PMDC.

Though the ministry issued a letter regarding de-sealing of the PMDC building, it did not allow the registrar and employees to enter the building for three days.

On April 2, the ministry filed an application in the IHC stating that the appointment of the PMDC registrar was illegal and that he should be removed, which the court refused to do so.

On the other hand, the registrar also filed an application that even after a decision on the contempt application, the government did not implement the court decision.

The ministry finally agreed to de-seal the PMDC building on April 7, but appealed to the SC against the IHC's refusal to remove the council's registrar.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC allows Dr AQ Khan to appear before court today*

News Desk

MAY 13, 2020








The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday allowed the country’s nuclear physicist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan to appear before the top court today (Wednesday) to hear his petition seeking enforcement of his fundamental rights, including right to free movement across the country.

The two-judge bench of the apex court presided over by Justice Mushir Alam took up a petition filed by Dr Khan through his counsel Taufiq Asif.

Dr AQ Khan had filed an appeal in the top court against the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) September 25, 2019 judgement that had rejected a similar plea of his on the grounds that it lacked jurisdiction in view of special security measures taken by the state for his protection.

The top court had also rejected the plea of the defence ministry’s counsel to hear the case in camera.


During the hearing, the bench wondered as to how the petitioner first approached the Islamabad High Court (IHC), and later went to the LHC on the same subject.

Justice Yahya Afridi asked the petitioner’s counsel that it could have been better to approach the IHC again.


Dr Khan’s counsel prayed that the petitioner is a national hero, as it is a matter of human rights, the apex court can thereafter exercise its power under Article 189 of the constitution.

“The petitioner himself wanted to appear before the court,” the counsel said.

Upon this argument, the court allowed Dr Khan and adjourned the hearing until Wednesday.

The scientist stated in his petition that he was the pioneer of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, and it was owing to the untiring efforts of the people at the helm of the affairs that he had succeeded in making the country a nuclear power.

The petitioner said that he felt proud of having done his bit to secure Pakistan from the ‘evil eyes of [its] neighbours and other adversaries’.

The physicist furthered said that ever since he had come to Pakistan and started working on the nuclear project, he had enjoyed personal security befitting of his status. But now the situation was such that personnel of security agencies had stationed themselves in a house next door to make sure no one had access to him, he claimed.

Dr Khan was not allowed to move around, attend social or academic functions within the country without the prior approval of security authorities, the petition stated, adding that “this situation amounted to the petitioner being kept in virtual confinement”.

“This act of security authorities is illegal since no such order has been conveyed to me warranting the treatment being meted out to me now,” Dr Khan said.


----------



## ghazi52




----------



## ghazi52

*Centre has introduced uniform national policy for Covid-19, Supreme Court told*








ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court was informed on Saturday that a uniform national policy has been proposed for combating Covid-19 in consultation with the provinces which will be implemented by the federal government in consistent manner throughout Pakistan.

The federal government as well as four provinces on Saturday submitted their respective reports in the Supreme Court in suo motu case regarding combating the pandemic of coronavirus.

A five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed will resume hearing tomorrow on May 18 in the instant matter.

Two new members, including Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, have been added to the bench due to non-availability of Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial will be hearing cases at the Lahore Registry from next week while Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will be hearing cases at the Karachi Registry.

Earlier, five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed was hearing the instant matter.

In pursuance of the court’s last order, the Centre and four provinces filed their respective reports about the steps taken for dealing with the pandemic.

In its report, the federal government through Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mahmood, informed the court that the latest meeting of the National Coordination Committee (NCC) presided over by Prime Minister Imran Khan proposed for adoption of uniform national policy for combating COVID-19 in consultation with the provinces which will be implemented by the federal government in consistent manner throughout Pakistan as per direction of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

It added that during the meeting Attorney General Khalid Javed informed about the order passed by the apex court in the suo motu case regarding coronavirus. The AG pointed out the observation of the apex court that a national uniformed policy should be adopted by the federal and provincial governments to combat the pandemic as it affects fundamental rights of the people.

The AG emphasised the apex court’s observations that the federal government has to take lead in consultation with the provincial governments, take into account the advice of the medical experts and implementation of required SOPs and the government should also reopen trade and businesses, particularly the small ones, including community shops and small traders being the vulnerable segments of the society, involving livelihood of millions of people.

The court was informed that after detailed deliberations, the committee decided that construction sector could proceed with phase-II of the plan as per SOPs till May 11. Offices, shopping malls, public congregations, wedding halls and public gatherings would remain closed until May 21, 2020.

The decision to extend the shutdown or otherwise would be taken before May 31, while small community markets in urban and rural areas would be opened,” it added.

The court was further informed that the committee decided that provinces would notify Saturday and Sunday as days for complete lock down except essential services.

The committee further decided that the matter of resuming the inter-city public transport and inter-provincial transport via air, road, rail could be deliberated further in the NCOC meetings, the court was informed adding that all educational institutions would remain closed till July 15, 2020 and further extension of the period of closing down could be reviewed in the last week of June, 2020.

Likewise, the Punjab government in its report while defending its steps being taken for dealing with COVID-19 submitted that the provincial government is empowered to make legislation pertaining to health sector as well as maintaining peace and informed the court that in order to take effective measures for providing better health facilities to the people as well as maintaining peace promulgated Punjab Infection Diseases and Control Prevention Ordinance 2020, adding that the federal government has empowered the provinces to take decision relating to lockdown.

The report claimed to have full harmony with the federal government, adding that the provincial government suspended business activities in line with the direction of the Centre.

The report further stated that there is no difference among the federal government and provinces relating to lockdown, adding that lockdown was necessary for the safety of the people.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC finds 'no valid reason' for keeping malls closed, says no need to keep markets closed on weekends*

May 18, 2020

Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed on Monday issued directions to reopen shopping malls across the country.

During a hearing of a suo motu case regarding measures taken to deal with the coronavirus crisis — being heard by a five-member bench comprising the CJP, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed — Justice Ahmed questioned the "logic" behind keeping malls closed.

In its written order, issued hours after the hearing was adjourned, the court noted that the Punjab government and Islamabad administration had approached the National Health Services and Research Centre (NHSRC) for permission to reopen malls and will likely obtain one today.

"If such can be done by the biggest province of Pakistan, i.e. Punjab, why the similar cannot be done by Sindh and apparently, we find no valid reason or justification for the same," the order read, directing Sindh government to approach the NHSRC for permission today.

It also observed that markets and shops were also opened in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Gilgit-Balitistan, and the governments had agreed to ensure that standard operating procedures (SOPs) are followed.

"We expect that after such application is made, the NHSRC shall give their decision today and if their decision is that shopping malls are allowed to open, the respective provincial government shall allow the shopping malls to be open and shall not create any hindrance or obstruction in this regard but ensure that SOPs are followed," the court order said.

The order also addressed the opening of markets on Saturday and Sunday, saying that the move was a "violation of Articles 4, 18 and 25 of the Constitution" and was not "justifiable".

"We do not find any justifiable rational or reasonable classification on the basis of which these two days are excluded from doing business, for that, all days of the week are the same. It is for the convenience of the human beings that the days have been given names, otherwise, there is no distinction between other days of the week from Saturday and Sunday."

The order "declared [the decision] to be illegal and accordingly set aside".

Earlier, during the hearing today, the chief justice had remarked: "Coronavirus does not go anywhere on Saturday and Sunday.

"What is the reason behind keeping markets closed on Saturday and Sunday?"

While responding to the queries by the bench, Sindh Advocate General Salman Talibuddin said that the province was implementing all decisions made by the National Coordination Committee (NCC), which is headed by Prime Minister Imran Khan.

The bench said that it will be the governments' responsibility to ensure that SOPs are being followed.

The court also restricted Karachi Commissioner Iftikhar Shallwani, who had appeared before court today, from sealing shops and markets.

"Instead of sealing shops, make sure that SOPs are followed," the chief justice said and directed the commissioner to reopen the shops that had been sealed. He inquired which "small markets" had been opened in the metropolis. The Sindh advocate general said that all markets, except shopping malls, were open.

"Are Zainab Market and Raja Bazar small markets?" the chief justice asked.

"About 70 per cent people go to malls for fun," Shallwani said. Earlier this month, the government had decided to ease restrictions across the country and had allowed businesses to operate with SOPs in place. Markets — that had been closed as part of measures taken to curb the novel coronavirus — were also reopened.

The SOPs went out the window once the lockdown was eased as hordes of people headed out to markets without taking any precautionary measures.

The Karachi administration had sealed multiple stores, markets and salons for allowing large crowds to gather.

*NDMA quizzed on expenses*
The top court bench, in its written order, said that it was "not at all satisfied" by the report presented by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), saying that it could "find no reason why so much money is being spent on this coronavirus".

"There are other serious ailments prevailing in the country, from which people are dying daily and those ailments are not being catered and the coronavirus (Covid-19), which apparently is not a pandemic in Pakistan, is swallowing huge money."

The order went on to say: "We are not suggesting by any means that the governments should not attend to coronavirus but we expect that the governments should not put all its resources for this one disease, nor the country should be made all together dysfunctional, because of this disease, for its consequences will be highly detrimental to the people of Pakistan, and the federal government and all provincial governments should address itself on this point."

During the hearing, the bench had grilled NDMA over the money being spent to deal with the coronavirus crisis. The NDMA had submitted a report over the amount spent on medical equipment and quarantine centres for suspected patients.

"What is the reason behind spending hundreds and thousands of rupees on one patient?" the chief justice had asked the NDMA representative.

"Money has been spent on medical equipment, testing kits and quarantine centres," the NDMA representative explained.

The chief justice expressed concerns over the money allocated to cope with the health crisis and said: "Corona did not come so that someone can take away Pakistan's money."

"Billions of rupees are being spent on tin charpoys," he added.

Justice Amin expressed similar reservations. "I don't think money is being spent on corona with due consideration," he said.

The NDMA representative said that Rs25 billion had been allocated to the body and all of it had not yet been spent. The chief justice said that apart from the amount allocated to NDMA, the government had also handed out money to provinces. Money had also been allocated for the Ehsaas Emergency Cash Programme.

Justice Ahmed inquired about the steps NDMA has taken to deal with the locust attack and said that crops planted for next year would not be able to grow.

"The agricultural sector will not remain as important if industries become operational," the chief justice said.

The hearing was adjourned until tomorrow.


----------



## ghazi52

*'Supreme Court not concerned about money being spent on Covid-19 but the quality of services being provided'*

Haseeb Bhatt

May 19, 2020







Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed says quarantine centres lack basic facilities, regrets the wasting of money. — SC website/File


Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed on Tuesday said that the top court was not concerned with the money being spent to cope with the coronavirus pandemic but the "quality of services" being provided across the country.

The top judge was hearing a suo motu case regarding measures taken to deal with the coronavirus crisis — being heard by a five-member bench comprising the CJP, Justices Mushir Alam, Sardar Tariq Masood, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed. Initially, the bench included Justices Umar Ata Bandial and Sajjad Ali Shah but they were later replaced by Justices Masood and Alam.

The remarks come a day after the bench, in a written order issued after Monday's hearing, had said that it was "not at all satisfied" by the report presented by the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), saying that it could "find no reason why so much money is being spent on this coronavirus".

"There are other serious ailments prevailing in the country, from which people are dying daily and those ailments are not being catered and the coronavirus (Covid-19), which apparently is not a pandemic in Pakistan, is swallowing huge money," the written order had said.

During today's hearing, the chairperson of the NDMA appeared before the court in order to give an explanation of the money being spent to deal with the pandemic. The bench summoned NDMA chief Lt Gen Muhammad Afzal on the rostrum and discussed the report submitted by the body. The chief justice noted that the report mentioned a company that manufactured personal protective equipment.

"What is Desto Pakistan Army? Is this a private company?" Justice Ahmed asked, adding: "The machinery for this company has been brought through a special plane."

The NDMA chief explained that Desto (Defence Science & Technology Organisation) was a subsidiary company of Strategic Plans Division Force (SPD).

The chief justice inquired if the machinery for Desto was being ordered from a single Chinese company and said that Pakistan only received "third class" material from China. The bench, after questioning NDMA chief, said termed yesterday's report as "very useful".

Justice Ahmed raised questions over the condition of quarantine centres saying that "10 people are sitting side by side".

"What kind of quarantining is this?" he inquired, saying that centres did not have clean bathrooms and there was also no water.

The chief justice said that "videos of quarantine centres' poor conditions are being circulated on social media" with residents telling expatriates who wished to return "to die abroad but don't come to Pakistan".

He noted that Pakistan was a poor country, saying "We are playing with money and don't care for the people."

"Graduates are not being utilised in our country," Justice Ahmed lamented. "Pakistan has a lot of talent, it should be used."

The attorney general of Pakistan told the court that Pakistan now had the capability to make ventilators. The chief justice said that the country should be self-sufficient in everything, warning that "there will be a time when nothing, including medicines, will be available from abroad". He further said that all surgical instruments could be made in Pakistan.


*'Court didn't say anything to Sindh govt'*

During the course of the hearing, Sindh Advocate General Salman Talibuddin told the court that the lockdown was no longer as effective as it was before.

"Beauty salons and barbershops are opening," he said. The Sindh government had earlier imposed a strict lockdown, that included the closure of all businesses and activities that might lead to gatherings of people.

"They are not opening because of us," the chief justice insisted in today's proceedings. "Your inspectors are giving permission after taking money."

The top judge went on to say that the "court had not said anything to Sindh government."

In its order yesterday, the court had directed the Sindh government to obtain permission from National Health Services and Research Centre to open shopping malls across the province. It had noted that Punjab and Islamabad had done the same.

"If such can be done by the biggest province of Pakistan, i.e. Punjab, why the similar cannot be done by Sindh and apparently, we find no valid reason or justification for the same," the order had read.

In today's hearing, Justice Masood said that administrations of Punjab and Islamabad had decided to open malls and the court's order was "limited to Sindh".

"Do not blame the court for the opening of malls," he said.

"Malls were being opened in the rest of the country so there should be no prejudice against Sindh [in this regard]," Justice Masood observed. He said that the court's order issued yesterday was "completely clear" and added: "Malls are situated in limited spaces where precautions can be taken. There is a lot of rush at Raja Bazar, Moti Bazar, Tariq Road."

The top judge noted: "Sindh government has opened all government offices. You have opened the sub-registrar's office." He added that the sub-registrar's office was a "corrupt institute".

"Government offices have been opened, not those of public service."

The chief justice further said that the order to keep markets open on Saturday and Sunday was only applicable until Eid. When asked to "clarify" that the restrictions had only been relaxed until Eid, the chief justice said that it will be done in the next hearing.

The court directed the federal and provincial governments to submit their reports on the progress made so far and adjourned the hearing until June 8.


----------



## ghazi52

*‘Not everything is about money’: SC questions govt over quality of services at quarantine centres*

The Frontier Post /

May 19, 2020


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan questioned the authorities on Tuesday regarding the provision of facilities at the coronavirus quarantine centres across the country to isolate and treat patients.

The five-member bench of the apex court resumed hearing the suo moto case today, where the National Disaster Management Authority’s Chairman LT Gen Mohammad Afzal was also present.

“The videos on social media are depicting the dire condition of the quarantine centres,” remarked Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed.

The CJP said that at the quarantine centres, people are not getting basic facilities such as running water and clean washrooms.

“Our concern is not related to the expenditure, it is about the quality of services,” said the top judge to the officials present before the court.

“We have seen videos of people from Lahore Expo Centre and Islamabad quarantine centres,” said Justice Ahmed, adding that people are agitated and urging others to ‘die abroad but not come back to Pakistan’.

“10 people are sitting together at the quarantine centres, what sort of quarantine is it?” he said.

The CJP remarked that Pakistan is a very poor country and this aspect is being neglected. The general impression is that the resources are not in the hands of relevant people, he added.

“Everything is not about money, do not base this on money… Money is not important, humans are.”

*‘Positive tests at government hospitals, negative in private labs’*
The CJP noted that the public is facing an uncertain situation regarding the coronavirus tests as they do not know whether they are actually infected or not.

“In Lahore, four people tested positive at a government facility, but at a private lab they tested negative,” he pointed out.

The CJP continued that in a recent clip, a man was seen crying that his wife was not infected with the virus but the health officials did not pay heed to him.

“What to do in such a situation?… The relatives of a patient keep complaining that their patient does not have the coronavirus,” said the CJP.

Giving the example of the SC Lahore registry, the top judge said that the employees faced a similar situation where they tested negative at a private lab.

He observed that there are resources present to facilitate the public but they are not performing to their maximum potential. 

The apex court stated that the NDMA is working primarily in cities but not in far-flung villages.

Justice Gulzar noted that all the major quarantine centres are in big cities. “All the government resources should be utilised for people.”

*‘No PPE kit imported since April 20’*
The NDMA chairman briefed the court regarding the government’s measures.

Since April 20 there has been no import of a PPE kit in the country, he told the court, adding that 300 ventilators out of 1,187 ordered have been received so far.

“We want products of good quality,” remarked the CJP, adding that the officials are importing safety equipment from only ‘one party’ in China.

The court emphasized that the country should be self-sufficient in the production of safety gear, to which the NDMA chairman responded that Pakistan is producing one million kits per month.

*AG urges court to give orders keeping in view severity of situation*
The Attorney General said that due to the court’s recent order to reopen shopping malls and small markets, the public is thinking that the coronavirus issue is not a serious matter.

The AG pointed out that the officials are now facing difficulty in implementation of measures due to the apex court’s orders.

He requested the court to keep in view the severity of the situation while giving remarks and orders.

Following which, the court stated that people are being affected by the coronavirus on a large scale and the SC will review the situation after Eid.

The court said that it gave earlier orders in the wake of Eid season but it will hold another session after the occasion.

The apex court subsequently adjourned the hearing until June 8.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC ignores plea to get experts’ views on pandemic*
Nasir Iqba

May 20, 2020





Reports from NDMA, provinces on funds sought. — AFP/File
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday ignored the plea of Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan to seek an opinion from a team of epidemiologists for gauging real threat level and amend its last order in which the apex court held that Pakistan was not affected seriously with the deadly coronavirus pandemic.

“This is a medical emergency, therefore, an opinion of medical experts be sought in a similar fashion as the court did in the controversy regarding Zakat distribution,” the AGP argued while emphasising that none of them was qualified enough to grasp the real danger being posed by the outbreak of global magnitude.

“All the experts are cautioning that the coming month of June may witness a spike in the coronavirus cases, the outcome of which may be horrendous,” the AGP feared, but regretted that the people were not taking the pandemic seriously. Coming from the highest court of the country, observations like these carried so much weight that sometimes even the educated people got confused and didn’t believe in the executive about the level of the threat.

“This is horrendous,” the AGP reiterated, adding that markets were flooded with buyers after the May 18 order of the apex court. Advocate General for Sindh Salman Talibuddin endorsed the attorney general’s point of view, observing that the lockdown and restrictions were no longer as effective as they had been earlier. He said even beauty parlours and barbershops were reopening.

Reports from NDMA, provinces on funds sought

However, Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, heading a five-judge bench of the SC, asserted that they (barbershops and markets) were reopening not because of the SC order, instead they were being allowed by the respective inspectors.

The CJP said the Sindh government had opened up its departments but closed the private sector.

Later, the five-judge bench in its order stated that although the AGP and AG-Sindh had requested the apex court to constitute a team of doctors to seek their opinion, the court for the time being did not find this essential as the government functionaries were alive and could do whatever they could in accordance with the law.

The SC order explained that the AGP, AG-Sindh and the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) had alarmed that the worst was yet to come and the government was expecting serious spike in June for which the available resources with the government were not that much to effectively cope with the Covid-19 situation.

The court asserted that it was aware of the prevalence of the pandemic that had caused casualties, and huge funds and resources would be needed for its prevention, but the country’s financial health was not such to deal with the alarming situation.

The bench noted that the government was striving its level best to do everything to mitigate the situation and appreciated NDMA Chairman Lt Gen Mohammad Afzal for providing useful report, highlighting that the personal protective equipment was being manufactured locally for which the private sector was also being encouraged.

The court had been assured, the order said, that all the medical equipment would be manufactured in Pakistan, including testing kits and medicines.

The court also sought reports from the NDMA and the provincial governments on the distribution of funds and highlighted that the provincial governments were liable to comply with all directives of the federal government under Article 149(4) of the Constitution in grave menace to the public peace, tranquillity and economic life of the people that included the spread of coronavirus.

At the outset of the hearing, Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed observed that the court was not concerned with the money being spent by the NDMA to deal with the virus, but with the quality of services being provided to the coronavirus patients in the country.

The chief justice expressed dismay over the state of affairs at different government-run quarantine centres with pathetic toilets, lack of sufficient water and where a number of patients spent time side by side without any social distancing.

_Published in Dawn, May 20th, 2020_


----------



## ghazi52

*SC bans entry of people ignoring SOPs*

June 06, 2020






Face mask to be be worn during the entire time any individual is within the court premises. — SC website
ISLAMABAD: Taking notice of non-adherence to the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for prevention of spread of coronavirus, the Supreme Court has barred entry into the court premises of people wearing no face mask or bypassing temperature and symptoms checking and not passing through the disinfectant tunnel.

A notification issued by the Supreme Court on Friday and was enforced immediately ordered that face mask would be worn during the entire time any individual was within the court premises.

The notification said it had been noticed that the preventive measures for minimising spread of Covid-19 were not being fully observed by staff members of the Supreme Court, employees of other offices located in the court building and general public, visitors and litigants.

Therefore, the notification said, the competent authority had taken notice of this trend and ordered that wearing of face mask and getting checked for fever/temperature was mandatory for all persons on entering the premises of the apex court at the principal seat of Islamabad and branch registries at Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta.

On Monday last, Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed had also taken notice of violation of social distancing in the Supreme Court.

Heading a five-judge bench, the chief justice had asked during a case hearing why the courtroom was jam-packed. “What happened to the formula of social distancing? Who are you and why are you sitting here,” he asked while pointing at the lawyers, media persons and litigants/people present in the courtroom.

“I don’t want something to happen in this court. You should care about social distancing and take precautionary measures,” the chief justice had said.

All judges are wearing face masks according the SOPs issued by the government as part of the precautionary measures against the Covid-19 pandemic.

_Published in Dawn, June 6th, 2020_


----------



## ghazi52

*SC withdraws order on reopening of markets on Saturday, Sunday*

The Frontier Post
June 8, 2020


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday withdrew its earlier order of reopening of markets, shopping malls on Saturday and Sunday.

A larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Gulzar Ahmed on Monday resumed hearing of the coronavirus suo motu case.

Last month, the Supreme Court ordered the opening of shopping malls across the country and said that the decision regarding the reopening of markets will be reviewed after Eid-ul-Fitr.

As the hearing went underway, the Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Javed Khan told the top court that the federal government was taking every necessary measure to control the spread of coronavirus in the country.

At which, Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed stated that the government has yet not made any legislation on protection against coronavirus.

“If every institution of the country can work then why not Parliament?” CJP Gulzar questioned.

The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) informed the court that the testing capacity has increased to 30,000 per day in Pakistan.

“30,000 tests are not enough in a country having a population of more than 220 million,” said CJP.

The CJP asked NDMA to increase testing labs and direct provinces to enhance the testing capacity.

CJP Gulzar also asked NDMA Member Legal to brief the court about what measures have been taken so far in controlling locust attacks.

The NDMA told the top court that the authority had brought a special jet from Turkey on lease for locust spray.

The apex court summoned a record of taking aircraft on lease from Turkey and adjourned the hearing for the next two weeks.

Last month, the Supreme Court of Pakistan said that the decision regarding reopening of shopping malls, markets across the country was till Eid-ul-Fitr and it will be reviewed after Eid.

During the hearing, the Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Javed Khan told the top court that coronavirus cases expected to peak in Pakistan by early June, and people were not taking the Covid-19 threat seriously after the apex court ordered to open shopping malls, markets.

At which, Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed stated that the reopening of these shops has nothing to do with SC remarks as police inspectors were permitting businesses to reopen after receiving bribery.


----------



## ghazi52

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday directed the federal government to make legislation for combating COVID-19 and ensure its implementation on the national level. The court also modified its previous order and withdrew its decision of opening markets and shopping malls over the weekend and allowed the government to form its own policy in this regard.

Last month, the court order opening of shops and markets for seven days a week to facilitate the public for Eid shopping, which were earlier shut down during the lockdown. A four-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed heard a suo motu case regarding combating COVID-19. Attorney General Khalid Javed, Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mahmood and Idress Mehsud, Member (Legal) National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) appeared before the court.

The court directed the federal government to take the matter of legislation for combating the pandemic seriously and ensure its implementation on national level. Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed observed that China had immediately enacted laws for dealing with the pandemic. The court also directed the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to submit before it on the next date of hearing complete details pertaining to the import of machinery for preparation of medical equipment as well as details regarding the aircraft taken on lease from Turkey for locust spray.

Similarly, the court directed that the federal government, Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) as well as all the provincial governments and AJK to ensure provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs) to all the sanitary workers with further direction that sanitary workers should not be allowed to indulge in going into the manholes without proper kits. The court also directed that all the respective governments should ensure that all facilities are provided to the sanitary workers besides enacting laws for their protection.

Earlier, during the course of proceeding, the court expressed its reservations about testing capacity of the pandemic. Idrees Mehsud, Member Legal, National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) while replying to court queries submitted that the testing capacity has been increased to 30,000 tests per day. He further informed the court that at present there are 100 laboratories in the country conducting test for coronavirus. The chief justice, however, observed that it is very little for a country with a 200 million population adding that 100 laboratories should only be set up in Karachi, which has the largest population. The chief justice asked that out of the these 100 laboratories, how many are run by the government and private sector. The NDMA member legal, however, replied that they are only supplying medical equipment to these laboratories adding that the Ministry of Health would better inform the court in this regard.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen, another member of the bench, observed that the NDMA should have proper statistics in this regard. When asked as to whether test for the pandemic is conducted free of cost by the facilities available at the government level, the Member Legal NDMA replied in affirmative. To a question about number of ventilators available for the COVID-19 patients, the Member Legal, NDMA submitted that China had donated 100 ventilators. He further informed the court that it has placed order for 1,473 ICU ventilators on June 5, 2020 out of which 341 have been delivered while 245 ventilators are expected to be delivered by June 15, 2020. To a question, he said that ventilators are also being manufactured by POF, Wah as well as in private sector. The court adjourned the hearing for two weeks.


----------



## ghazi52

*The short order*

Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Justice Faisal Arab, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed ruled that within seven days of the verdict, the "concerned Commissioner of Inland Revenue shall himself (and not some other officer) issue appropriate notices under the Income Tax Ordinance" to Justice Isa's wife and children.

The notice will direct them to "offer an explanation regarding the nature and source of the funds whereby the three properties in the United Kingdom that are in the names of the spouse and the children were acquired".

According to the court order, the respondents shall submit their replies and any "such material and record as is deemed appropriate"

"In case any of them is outside the country, it shall be the responsibility of such person to timely file a response, and the proceedings before the Commissioner shall not be adjourned or delayed for the reason of non-availability in Pakistan of such person," stated the order.

Upon receipt of the response, the Commissioner shall "give an opportunity of hearing to the respondents in person or through an authorized representative/counsel".

"The proceedings shall be concluded before the Commissioner within 60 days of the date of receipt of the notices as aforesaid, and the order shall be issued by him within 75 days of the said date of receipt, and no adjournment or extension in time whatsoever shall be given," it was further stated in the order.

Subsequently, the FBR chairman shall submit a report duly signed by him to the SJC regarding the proceedings, ensuring that the entire record of the proceedings is appended. 

"If, within 100 days from the date of this Order, no report as aforesaid is received by the Secretary from the Chairman, FBR, he shall inform the Chairman of the Council accordingly and shall, if so directed by him, write to the Chairman, FBR requiring an explanation as to why the report has not been received," the order stated.

*'On the wrong bus'*
The petitioner's lawyer, Munir A Malik, concluded his arguments in court by saying that the federation had "gotten on the wrong bus" in the case. 

Malik urged the court to dismiss the reference against the judge. He said that a website had been used to search for properties in London. The lawyer told the court that if one wanted to search properties in London, he/she had to pay for the privilege. 

He said that the website sends a payment receipt to the relevant person who uses it to search for properties, via email. He said that British-Pakistani lawyer Zia ul Mustafa, who had searched for Justice Isa's alleged assets, had received three copies of the high commission's verified properties. 

"Copies of politicians' properties searched were attached as well [in documents submitted]," he said. "If the government provides receipts as well then it will be revealed as to who searched for the properties," he added. 

Malik said that if the search for the properties was conducted by the ARU, then it should provide receipts. He said that it seemed as if the ARU had only facilitated the search. 

"The government only wants to remove the author of the Faizabad dharna case," noted Malik. 

*Justice Isa's wife submits money trail*
The spouse of Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Thursday gave the money trail for the purchase of the three properties in United Kingdom (UK), saying that 700,000 sterling pounds had been transferred from her personal account through a private bank in Karachi.

Zarina Montserrat Khoso Carrera, the wife of Justice Qazi Faez Isa, recorded her statement via video link before the court and submitted that details pertaining to her accounts were available with the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP).

The court, while expressing satisfaction over the statement of spouse of Justice Isa, asked her that in order to examine the matter on merit, she would have to approach the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) or the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), and a decision in that regard would be given by the tax authorities.

Justice Isa had informed the Supreme Court the other day that his wife was willing to explain before the apex court through video link about the three properties acquired in United Kingdom (UK).

Recording her statement, the lady thanked the apex court for providing her with such an opportunity. “I am very much nervous as this is my first experience before the court, but I will try my best to follow your instructions,” Zarina said, adding that it has been a critical time for her as her father was near to death these day.

She said that she was married to Justice Qazi Faez Isa in the year 1982, and also showed her birth certificate and the old National Identity Card, saying her name was Zarina, adding that she did not know that she would buy properties in London after 21 years of marriage.

She submitted that she got her computerized identity card in the year 2003 and her name remained the same, adding that at that time her husband was not a judge. She said that she was entitled to Spanish passport, as her mother was Spanish and therefore she has a Spanish passport.

She said that when her visa expired, she applied for a fresh visa. When she got it, her husband was not a judge, but a lawyer. “So the allegation that I used the office of my husband for acquiring the visa was baseless,” Zarina Isa contended.

She stated that in the year 2020, she was granted visa only for one year and prior to that she was harassed and that’s why she was granted visa for a very limited period of time. She said that she bought the first property in the year 2004 in United Kingdom, adding that she was employed at an American School in Karachi and at that time, one Rehan Naqvi used to deal with her tax matters.

The spouse of Justice Isa showed the court the certificate issued by the tax authorities as she was filing her tax returns, adding that when her tax record was transferred from Karachi to Islamabad, she asked the FBR in that regard; however, she alleged that the FBR did not reply to her request.

She said that she had agricultural lands which were in Jaccobabad (Sindh) and Dera Murad Jamali (Balochistan) while her father used to look after the land while the government was well aware of all that.

She said that Rehan Naqvi had advised her to open foreign account, which she did and through that account, she transferred the money abroad for purchasing the properties. At this, she showed the court the record of her foreign currency account, saying she had to face great difficulties in seeking its details as, she added, the bank didn’t maintain 10-year old account.

The spouse of Justice Isa submitted that from 2003 to 2013, the whole amount was transferred from these accounts to London for purchasing these properties, adding that the money was transferred in her name and from her account as well.

She said that she bought one property for 236,000 sterling pounds, adding that she transferred 700,000 sterling pounds through a private bank for purchasing the properties. “All documents which I have shown are genuine and authentic and the London Bank Account is also in her name,” Zarina Isa added.

She said that another property was purchased in 2013 for 245,000 sterling pounds and in that flat, her son was living, while another property, which was in her and her daughter’s names was purchased for 270,000 sterling pounds. She said that now she was filing tax returns both in the UK and Pakistan, adding that she had already filed tax returns of London properties in the year 2018.

Meanwhile, Justice Umar Ata Bandial asked Mrs Isa that they had no jurisdiction to hear the matter on merit. However, he expressed satisfaction over her statement, and advised her that right now there were two relevant forums available to her: one was the FBR and the second was the SJC.

The judge advised her to present her all documentary proofs to those forums as those were competent to decide her case. “We felt that you have sufficient documents to present and I am sure that you will be heard properly; therefore, I wish you present these documents before the relevant forums,” Justice Bandial told the lady.

“Why I was not asked earlier and I waited for 13 months while my son was subjected to harassment in London,” Zarina Isa questioned. She said that she was not asking for any privilege, but she should be treated as an ordinary citizen in Pakistan.

Justice Bandial, however, said that she would be treated with respect and dignity, adding that she was a brave lady and hoped that she would be able to address her matter effectively.

“I must tell you one thing, we, as judges, are answerable for our actions in private and public life; therefore, we are much more accountable than other people, as we are holding other people accountable,” Bandial told Justice Isa's wife. “This not the trial of your husband and yours as well, but the trial of our institution,” Justice Bandial added.

When the spouse of Justice Isa continued, Justice Bandial called Munir A Malik, counsel for Justice Qazi Faez Isa to rostrum, who then asked Zarina to sign out. Justice Maqbool Baqar remarked that what was going on in the country in the name of accountability would also be looked into. He said destruction (of institutions) was under way in the country in the name of accountability and they would write (in the verdict) on it also.

Justice Baqar asked if the Supreme Justice Council (SJC) could review the performance of the president. To which, the federation’s lawyer, Farogh Naseem, said that it (Council) has the authority to review anyone’s performance.

Later, the court directed Barrister Farogh Naseem to submit before it in sealed envelop the record of 2018 tax returns, filed by Mrs Isa. Justice Umar Ata Bandial asked Farogh Naseem that the lady had also complained about the FBR attitude, to which the counsel for the federation submitted that if the complaint was proved true, it could be directly lodged with the prime minister.

Meanwhile, Farogh Naseem submitted before the court that Khalid Ranjha, Irfan Qadir, Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Aamir Rehman, and Sohail Mahmood, who were to represent president, prime minister, as well as other respondents, have adopted his arguments; hence they will not be arguing before the court. At this, the court adjourned the hearing for Friday (today) wherein Munir A Malik, counsel for Justice Qazi Faez Isa, was to argue in rebuttal.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC suspends PHC’s release order of 196 military court convicts*


Seeks record of cases against them; adjourns hearing till July 24


July 21, 2020









ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday suspended the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC’s) order to release 196 military court convicts, and sought details of cases against them.

A three-member bench of the SC, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, heard a petition against the PHC’s verdict given on June17.

The apex court inquired whether the convicts were released from jail following the PHC’s decision. The additional attorney general (AAG) informed the SC that convicts had not been released as of yet. The AAG then requested the decision of the Peshawar High Court to be suspended.

Justice Qazi Amin remarked that the convicts were convicted after a trial by military courts, he added that each case will have its own particular evidence and facts.

Suspending PHC’s order, SC adjourned the hearing till July 24.

On July 11, a two-member bench, comprising of PHC Chief Justice Waqar Ahmed Seth and Justice Muhammad Naeem Anwar, issued a 426-page detailed judgment on the appeals of the convicts. The court allowed their release if they were not involved in any other case.

The judgment said that the convicted persons were neither allowed to meet their relatives nor given a chance to defend themselves. It also pointed out that there were no direct first information reports (FIRs) or complaints registered against them, and neither were any investigations carried out to prove the allegations against them.

The judgment added that the convicts were not given the right to file an appeal on their own. Hence, the judgment described the entire proceedings against them as a violation of relevant laws and human rights.

In the majority of the cases, the judgment observed, the convicts were arrested and kept in detention centres for months and years. The court maintained that the appellants were kept in isolation during custody and were not allowed to meet their relatives, nor were they given a chance to defend themselves.

In 196 cases, according to the ruling, the government and the relevant institutions provided records to the court in 18 months, while no record could still be presented in more than 150 appeals.


----------



## ghazi52

*Apex court seeks details of all NAB DGs appointments*

The Frontier Post
August 5, 2020

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought details regarding appointments of all National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Director Generals (DGs).

A two-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Mushir Alam sought appointment details of NAB DGs while hearing a bail application of Muhammad Nadeem Abbasi, an accused of committing fraud by becoming a NAB officer.

During the course of proceedings, the court also issued notice to the Attorney General for Pakistan.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa said Muhammad Nadeem was a middle pass and how did he call from Bahawalpur pretending as a NAB officer?

He said the accused called the Managing Director (MD) Pakistan State Oil (PSO) as DG NAB. The middle pass accused had only one buffalo, he added.

He asked how did the accused get the mobile numbers of senior officers?

The NAB Prosecutor said that different complaints were received from 22 persons including MD PSO.

The court also expressed annoyance over Advocate General Islamabad Niazullah Niazi and NAB Prosecutor Imranul Haq for not providing proper assistance.

Later, hearing of the case was adjourned till date in office.

Matiuulah Jan suo moto case; IG Islamabad submits report in SC: The Inspector General (IG) of Police on Wednesday submitted report before the Supreme Court regarding alleged kidnapping of journalist Matiullah Jan. 

The report stated that terrorism provisions had been added to the case and a committee headed by DIG Operations was investigating the matter. 

The report stated that the concerned agencies had been requested for assistance.

Application for provision of CCTV footage, mobile CDRs had been forwarded for investigation, it added.

The report stated that the investigation team had also written a letter to the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) officials to identify Zarak Khan. No response had been received from any department so far, it added.


----------



## ghazi52

*CJP orders to make Karachi Circular Railway operational this year*







Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed. — The News/Files


The operations of Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) should start its operations this year, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Gulzar Ahmed directed officials.

The CJP issued the instructions to secretary railways during the hearing of a case pertaining to the restoration of the mass-transit system at the Supreme Court’s Karachi Registry.

CJP Gulzar rejected the statement of secretary transport regarding the rehabilitation of the KCR track in the city and also reprimanded the secretary railways.

"[The] time we had given you for the restoration of the circular railway was running out and we would take contempt action against you," the CJ remarked.

The secretary transport informed the court that there were 24 crossings on the track and that underpasses or overhead bridges needed to be constructed at 10 intersections.

He added that from these 10 crossings more than 2000 vehicles pass through while the remaining 14 intersections have no traffic.

“Rs5 billion have been allocated for the construction and the tender process will be completed this week,” secretary transport said.

To this, the chief justice remarked: "Will you continue to extend the time like this or will the process ever be completed? Work on the superhighway is not complete yet, you will spend five to ten years in the project."

The CJP then inquired about the time required for the construction of gates, to which the secretary railways said that it would take six more months.

Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed then told the official to keep this in mind that the KCR has to run this year.


----------



## ghazi52

*Mafias feed govts, says Supreme Court*

August 11, 2020
KARACHI: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday observed that mafias were financing the governments as they knew no action will be taken against them due to monetary benefits they gave to the governments.

Hearing petitions against illegal encroachments on public parks, amenity lands, revival of Karachi Circular Railways and unauthorized multi-storeyed buildings in Karachi, the SC’s three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, took an exception over lack of administration and poor governance in Karachi and observed that the government's writ does not seem to exist in Karachi.

The court observed that mafias were operating without any fear of the government writ and government functionaries were reluctantto take any action against them as they knew that they will stop their financing and monetary benefits.

The court observed that the city was facing a disastrous situation and it has to be handed over to some capable administration. The court observed that writ of the law is not applicable in Karachi while the chief minster Sindh was only seen visiting places on helicopter adding that neither municipal nor provincial government did anything for betterment of the city.

The court deplored that the Sindh government could not even take action against the KE though eight to 10 persons were killed due to electrocution. The court observed how an electric company has dared shut down electricity of the city and no action was taken against it. The court summoned the chief executive officer of the KE to appear before the court and observed that the court will see how electricity is closed down in the city.

The court observed that there will be no closure of electricity and if anyone dies due to failure of electricity, then FIR will be lodged against the CEO of the KE and names of responsible persons will be placed on the Exit Control List.

The court took an exception over the performance of KE for its frequent loadshedding in different parts of the city and observed that the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority should have taken control of the KE as it had failed to provide uninterrupted electricity to Karachi.

The CJP remarked that KE was gaining profits worth billions of dollars from Karachi and cleared its debts obtained from foreign financial institutions. The CJP observed that Karachi was a lawless city where every institution and department was master of its own will and every department has its own criminal procedure, penal laws and constitution.

The Chief Justice observed that the Sindh government, local bodies departments were the biggest enemy of the Karachi. The CJP took an exception over the performance of Mayor Karachi Waseem Akhtar and observed why he remained in the office and why did not he consider resigning and leaving the office when he could not deliver to the masses. The court observed that previous mayors of the city had destroyed Karachi and everybody was blaming each other and interested in destroying the city instead of protecting it. The court observed that infrastructure of the city had collapsed as children were dying in the open manholes while the government functionaries remained indifferent towards miseries of citizens. The court directed the commissioner Karachi to remove all billboards and hoardings from public properties of the city and examine the advertisement boards on private properties and remove billboards which were dangerous and did not fulfill the approved standard of the law.

The court took an exception over non-arrest of District Municipal Corporation’s officers involved in hoarding board falling case and directed the SSP South to arrest them and produce before the court. The court was informed that FIR of the billboard that fell near the Hotel Metropole building has been registered and disciplinary action has been taken against responsible officers who allowed permission for installation of such a billboard at the private building.

The court took an exception to delay in completion work of the Karachi Circular Railway despite the court order since June 2019 and it had to be completed in this year. The court directed railways and the Sindh government to complete the exercise within six months. The secretary railways submitted that nine-kilometer track has been cleared from encroachments while the remaining work has been halted due to non-construction of 10 underpasses agreed by the Sindh government.

The secretary transport submitted that the government has allocated Rs3 billion funds for construction of underpasses at KCR track for smooth functioning of KCR and tender process will be started within a week and underpasses will be completed within six months. He said that 14 other places were also examined but there was no need of underpasses at such places and manual measures could take care for smooth functioning of KCR.

The court observed that in case such manual arrangements were not found suitable, then the Sindh government shall proceed construction of underpasses in such places within the shortest-possible time. The court also directed the Sindh government to complete the fencing of necessary parts of the tracks within three months.

The court directed commissioner Karachi to complete the demolition exercise of Royal Park Residency, which was illegally constructed on two acres of land near the Alladin Park within three months. The court also issued a notice to foreign national owner of the land to file comments on application of allottees with regard to return of their outstanding dues along with 10pc interest rate.

The court directed commissioner Karachi to remove illegal construction of houses and a private school at Hill Park and Kidney Hill areas. The court observed that plots in question were part of the Hill Park area and property of KMC instead of PECHS; however, owners of the plots were free to claim their money from concerned authorities as per law.

The court observed that private schools cannot be allowed to operate on amenity land and directed private school administrations to remove the structure of building and return to the education society from which it took possession for running the private school. The court observed that private schools were operating in several residential houses in North Nazimabad and other parts of the city.

Regarding the construction of multi-storyed building at Com-3 situated at Benazir Park in the Boat Basin area, the court issued a notice to director general Karachi Development Authority to file the relevant report with regard to complete history of the plot along with necessary documents including maps.

The private builder's counsel submitted that Com-3 was a commercial plot and construction of multi-storyed commercial cum residential building was permissible under the law. Shehri representative Amber Ali Bhai submitted that Com-3 was not a commercial plot as claimed by the applicant and the subject plot was created for amenity and recreation purposes of the Benazir Park’s visitors.

On encroachments at Shahrah-e-Qaideen, the court directed the commissioner to remove encroachments from Shahrah-e-Qaideen and Khudadad Colony and beautify the greenbelts and amenity land with plantation and greenery. The court observed the Lines Area should be revamped by creating reasonable accommodation for the residents of the area. The court observed that Lines Area was once a beautiful area of the city but later on allotments of land were given without any proper documentation.

The court directed the Civil Aviation Authority to complete the park at Jinnah Airport within six months and no further commercial activity or construction will be allowed in 130 acres land meant for the park.

The court directed lessees of the dilapidated Sea Breeze Plaza to deposit cost of retrofitting of the building before the court within two months. The counsel of Sea Breeze Plaza lessee submitted that their clients were prepared to get the building repaired through retrofitting to make it habitable and willing to incur the cost of repair. The representative of NESPAK submitted that retrofitting of the building can be done but it could cost up to Rs500 million.

The court directed the counsel of the Sea Breeze Plaza lessee to deposit Rs50 million within two weeks while remaining Rs.450 million are to be deposited within two months as the consultants of NESPAK and Pakistan Engineering Council carry out repair of the building and ensure that the building shall not become any threat to the people or occupants for habitation.

The court also stayed the construction activities at the Karachi Gymkhana on application of commissioner Karachi. Advocate General Sindh submitted that KG was a heritage building and maintained by the heritage law and rules.


----------



## ghazi52

*CJP says Sindh government is a complete failure*

The Frontier Post
August 12, 2020


KARACHI (TLTP): Observing that neither the Sindh government nor the local government is working on removing the encroachments, the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to clean up all the nullahs in Karachi and remove encroachments along them.

A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed, issued these directives while hearing a petition related to encroachments on nullahs in the port city.

The Chief Justice remarked that the Sindh government is a “complete failure” and its people are only enjoying themselves.

Commissioner Karachi Iftikhar Shallwani presented a report to the court over operations undertaken by the authorities against encroachments.

However, the court expressed dissatisfaction with the report and instead lambasted the Sindh and local governments over lack of progress. The court also directed the Sindh government to assist the NDMA.

The report said that Karachi has 38 major nullahs and 514 small nullahs which are under the control of the DMCs. The commissioner told the court that the NDMA is working on cleaning only three major nullahs of the city. The commissioner told the court that people had been living on land encroached on the mullahs for the last ten years.

“The Sindh government has done nothing for the people. You did nothing in the last 20 years,” remarked CJP Ahmed.

To this, the advocate general Sindh intervened and informed the court that when the government goes to remove the encroachments, people start “attacking” them.

He added that a “law and order situation” gets created.

“This is the writ of your government. Where is the writ of the government in Karachi?” asked the CJP for the government lawyer’s response. He remarked that the city is full of sewerage water and people walk on streets by placing stepping stones on the water.

Meanwhile, Justice Faisal Arab also expressed his disappointment with the state of affairs in the province, deploring that people have to approach the courts for water and electricity.

“There is a mafia operating here. There is no law,” said CJP Ahmed. He added that the “complete government machinery” was involved in how the situation was in the province.

During the hearing, the attorney general of Pakistan informed the court that the federal government is closely looking into the matters of Karachi.

“We are looking at all constitutional and lawful options,” the attorney general informed the court. He added that Karachi is a metropolitan city and no one can see its metropolitan city being “destroyed”.

“I cannot give my final word on Karachi but a decision will be made soon,” the attorney general told the court.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*SC turns down plea to reassign drain cleaning to Sindh govt*


Agencies

AUGUST 14, 2020









The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday rejected Sindh government’s petition to reassign the responsibility for cleaning Karachi’s drainage system to it instead of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA).


The apex court, under Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, made the decision after resuming hearing in a case regarding rain-related problems and unscheduled load shedding in the provincial metropolis. The Sindh government presented a report related to its performance in the recent monsoon season and the measures it took to mitigate the problems caused by heavy rains.


“You [the Sindh government] show us pictures after cleaning up two nullahs and claim that [all of] Karachi has been cleaned up now,” the top judge remarked on the performance report. he inquired that if the drains were being cleaned up as was claimed then why did water inundate the city during the rains. “If the Sindh government was cleaning the drains then why did the NDMA have to step in?” the judge asked the provincial authorities.

The advocate general responded saying it is not clear why the NDMA was sent to the city, claiming that 50% work was already done on the Gujjar nullah and 20-25% on the other major drains when the authority took charge. The provincial government then sought time till August 30 for cleaning up the drainage system of the city. To this, Justice Aijaz-ul-Hasan reminded the officials that the NDMA was already cleaning up the drains. He urged the Sindh government to help alleviate the problems of the residents of the metropolis.


The court also rejected a report submitted by K-Electric over continuous electricity load shedding in Karachi. The CJP remarked that power of half of the city was suspended after court orders, to which the K-Electric claimed that Pakistan State Oil (PSO) was not providing fuel to it.


https://dailytimes.com.pk/653688/sc-turns-down-plea-to-reassign-drain-cleaning-to-sindh-govt/


----------



## ghazi52

*SC gives four weeks for restructuring of Pakistan Railways*

Hearing adjourned for four weeks

August 20, 2020









ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) Thursday on gave four weeks to restructure the Pakistan Railways on the request of the Planning Commission.

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed heard the suo motu case regarding losses incurred by the Pakistan Railways. Along with orders of restructuring the railways to the Planning Commission, the apex court also sought a progress report on the circular railway from the Sindh government and the provincial railway department.

“The bridge built by the British at Kotri is still in good condition, while the Karachi-Hyderabad bridge could collapse at any moment,” CJP Ahmed said. “There is no bridge on the Indus that the nation can be proud of.”

The chief justice added that bridges constructed during Ayub Khan’s era were still in better condition, whereas, all bridges built afterwards in the country are not in the best condition. "Good bridges should be built for Main Line-1 (ML-1)."

Secretary railways prayed upon the court that package one of ML-1 would be completed in three years in which state-of-the-art bridges would be constructed.The chief justice responded that three years is too long a time period.

“The Chinese lay railway lines in months,” he said. “If funds are available, then the project should not take time to complete. Laying a track of 1,800kms is not a problem for China.”

Karachi Commissioner also informed the court that the tender had been issued for fencing of railway stations in Karachi.

The apex court adjourned the hearing for four weeks.


----------



## ghazi52

*RO cannot disqualify a lawmaker for life: Supreme Court*

Apex court says forum of returning officer lacks the attributes of a court of law


Hasnaat Malik
August 22, 2020










Three-judge bench of the Supreme Court heard a review petition filed by a disqualified lawmaker. 



*ISLAMABAD: The country’s top court has ruled that a returning officer (RO) – an official responsible for overseeing elections in one or more constituencies – cannot disqualify a lawmaker for the lifetime under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution.*
"Since the forum of the returning officer lacks the attributes of a court of law therefore the electoral disqualification imposed on the review petition under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution ceased to be effective after the 18th Amendment,” said an 8-page judgment authored by Justice Umar Ata Bandial.
Justice Bandial issued the verdict as part of a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court which heard a review petition filed by a disqualified lawmaker Allah Dino Khan Bhayo.
In the judgment, the bench adjudicated as to whether an RO's December 3, 2007 finding against Bhayo ahead of 2008 general elections is final and binding for the purpose of permanently disqualifying him from contesting any election.
During the summary proceedings held for scrutiny of Bhayo’s nomination papers, the RO had concluded that the equivalence certificate issued by Khairpur’s Shah Abdul Latif University for the petitioner’s madrassa degree was fake. He had disqualified Bhayo from contesting election from PS-12 Shikarpur-II.
In the wake of the RO’s order, the petitioner stepped out of the elections and did not challenge the finding. However, he contested in May 2013 general election and got elected as a member of the Sindh Assembly in the year 2013.
However, later a complaint was filed against him and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in exercise of its powers under Section 103-AA of the Representation of People Act, 1976 (Ropa) declared him disqualified under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
The ECP’s decision was based on the December 3, 2007 finding of the RO. The petitioner later challenged the said finding but an SC bench ultimately upheld the ECP order. The petitioner later filed a review petition against the order.
A three-judge bench led by Justice Bandial heard the review petition. In its judgment, it noted that a disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) can only be imposed by or under a declaration by a court of law.
"By such prescription Article 62(1)(f) creates a lawful, transparent and fair mechanism for an election candidate to contest an allegation that he is disqualified under one or more of the grounds listed in the said Constitutional provision."
The court noted that it is evident that the summary finding given by the RO against the review petitioner in the year 2007 did not comply with the requirement laid out in Article 62(1)(f) as amended in the year 2010, namely a declaration by a court of law.
"This is because a RO does not record evidence in his proceedings which are summary in nature. His finding, unless set aside, is therefore valid only for the corresponding election.
“In these circumstances, the doctrine of res judicata would also be inapplicable to the finding of the RO because although the said finding remained unchallenged, the same was given without the recording of evidence including the right of cross examination."
The judgment noted that according to the settled law, the amended provision of Article 62(1)(f) is effective prospectively from the date of its enforcement.
This provision governs all disqualification claims that arise after its promulgation in the year 2010. In the present case, disqualification of the petitioner was sought in the general election held in 2013 when a declaration by a court of law was necessary to attract the constitutional disqualification.
“On the other hand, the finding of the RO in the present case was rendered in 2007 prior to the amendment in Article 62(1)(f). Such a finding was not a verdict given after a trial by a court of law; namely, for the purposes of this case, an election tribunal or a court of plenary jurisdiction"
The court, however, clarified that a finding of dishonesty remains an ignoble impediment against the election of the petitioner. Therefore, it must be overcome by the petitioner if at any stage in the future he wishes to contest elections.
“An allegation of dishonesty based on the certificate of Shah Abdul Latif University rather than the finding of the RO dated 03.12.2007, may still be invoked against the petitioner.
“This would involve the allegation that the petitioner committed forgery in the year 2007 by falsely claiming his educational qualification to be equivalent to a graduation degree.”
As this allegation, it said, remains unchallenged by the petitioner, any aggrieved party can in future object before the competent forum that dishonesty of the petitioner is apparent from the university’s finding to the effect that he relied on a fake equivalence certificate for his sanad issued by a madrassa"
The court allowed review petition and recalled its observation regarding his disqualification for lifetime under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
*Debate on applicability of Article 62*
A section of lawyers believes that the court jurisdiction on election matters is inconsistent, confusing and conflicting. Since 2009, the apex court has initiated a process to disqualify lawmakers by exercising the jurisdiction of quo warranto.
When the apex court held that an RO could not disqualify any lawmaker under Article 62 (1) (f) through summary trial and without recording evidence then how the superior courts could do the same by exercising quo warranto.
However, a legal expert said the superior courts could disqualify a lawmaker on admitted facts in writ jurisdiction. He, however, added that in the presence of Article 225 of Constitution, the superior courts must show restraint to examine the eligibility of any lawmaker in quo warranto jurisdiction.
Two years ago, the SC evolved a jurisprudence wherein while exercising suo motu power, it could disqualify a lawmaker but on the other hand, an election petition against the same MNA or MPA might be rejected on technical grounds for not fulfilling the verification process.
Even in the Sheikh Rashid disqualification case, SC judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa had raised several questions about the quo warranto jurisdiction wherein the eligibility of lawmakers was being examined by the superior courts under Articles 184 (3) and 199 of Constitution.
Justice Isa questioned as to whether the superior courts could intervene in election matters in view of Article 225 of Constitution wherein it is held that they would only be challenged in election tribunals.
Legal experts have urged the SC to form a larger bench to settle all conflicts related to election matters. Even Justice Isa in the Sheikh Rashid case had raised seven questions in this regard. However, former CJP Mian Saqib Nisar had not formed a larger bench on that matter.
Justice Isa also said the scope of Article 225, which specifically dealt with election disputes, also needed to be considered and whether on the principle of the “specific excluding the general '' this article excluded resorting to Article 184(3) of the Constitution in respect of individual election disputes.
He also questioned if an election dispute could be categorized as a matter of “public importance” and which particular fundamental right stands infringed that needed “enforcement”.











RO cannot disqualify a lawmaker for life: Supreme Court | The Express Tribune


Apex court says forum of returning officer lacks the attributes of a court of law




tribune.com.pk


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs BHC to review matter regarding buildings higher than 30 feet*


The Frontier Post
August 24, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday directed the Balo-chistan High Court (BHC) to review the matter of taking action against buildings higher than 30 feet.
A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case. 
During the course of proceedings, Advocate Aman Ullah Kunrani counsel for the private hospital said a hearing was held in the high court on August 18, in which his client was made a party.
He said the high court took action on a news item published in newspapers and decided the case without hearing his client.
He said the SC ruled in 2014 that the high court could not take suo moto action. 
There were many buildings over thirty feet high, he said adding the high court’s own building was more than fifty feet high.
Later, the court directed the BHC to review the matter and disposed of the case.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*SC cancels bail of 9 accused of brazen attack*

The Frontier Post 
August 24, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday canceled the bail of nine accused of brazen assault.
The nine accused involved in brazen attack belonging to Mailsi Tehsil of Vehari District of Punjab had been arrested from the premises of the SC.
A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case. 
During the hearing, Zulfiqar Maluka counsel for the plaintiff and complainant Muhammad Shahbaz said the accused had harassed the women working in the agriculture fields in Mailsi area of Vehari district. When the women’s families came, the accused injured them with sticks, he added.

Justice Qazi Amin said several cases had already been registered against the accused.

He asked why did the accused come to the SC when the high court asked them to submit surety bonds?
The apex court rejected the bail pleas of accused including Mumtaz Ahmed, Ghulam Farid, Mazhar Hussain, Mohammad Akhtar, Mohammad Azhar, Zafar Iqbal, Azhar Mumtaz, Mazhar Mumtaz and Mohammad Iqbal.
It is pertinent to mention here that Muhammad Shahbaz filed an application of brazen attack against accused in Mailsi police station.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khan vilatey

Is the Islamabad high court an agent of India and full of RAW agents ?


----------



## ghazi52

*SC adjourns hearing regarding deforestation in KP for a week*

The Frontier Post 
August 25, 2020

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of a case pertaining to deforestation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) for a week. 
A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case.
During the hearing, petitioner’s lawyer Iftikhar Gilani argued that Rs40 million of people were stuck so that he wanted to give detailed arguments in the case if allowed.
This was not my personal case but a public case, he added. 
To this, Justice Qazi Amin addressing the counsel said he paid tribute to him for saving the public money.
The Supreme Court ordered rehearing of the case regarding the deforestation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) at the request of lawyer Iftikhar Gilani.
SC issues notice to NAB in Anwar Majeed’s bail matter: The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday issued a notice to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in bail matter of Anwar Majeed, a main accused in fake bank accounts case.
A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Qazi Amin said Anwar Majeed wanted to travel abroad for medical treatment but the past experience in that regard was not good.
Advocate Munir A Malik counsel for Anwar Majeed said his client’s operation could only take place abroad.
He said the surgery suggested for Anwar Majeed was not successful in Pakistan.
The court after hearing arguments issued notice to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and sought reply till September 2.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*
SC fines Federal Ombudsman Secretariat over filing misleading application*


The Frontier Post
August 25, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday fined the Federal Ombudsman Secretariat Rs100,000 over filing an unnecessary and misleading application.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan announced the decision on a petition filed by the Federal Ombuds-man Secretariat against the Lahore High Court judgment. The decision was reserved on August 11.
The four-page judgment authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah stated, “The filing of this petition by the Wafaqi Mohtasib’s Secretariat through its secretary has left us concerned and disturbed. We, therefore, direct the Ombudsman to hold an inquiry into the matter and submit a report to this court within two months from today as to who had authorized the filing of the instant petition and the action taken against the concerned officials.”
The judgment stated, “This hopelessly misconceived petition passes for frivolous litigation and has resulted in wasting the time of the court. Therefore, this petition is dismissed with costs of Rs100,000 imposed under Order XXVIII, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980. The costs shall be deposited with any approved, recognized and well-known charitable organization and receipt thereof be submitted with the deputy registrar of this court (Lahore Registry) within two months from today. In case of failure to comply with the directions in this paragraph or paragraph 7 (above), the office shall fix this petition before the court for necessary orders. Leave is, therefore, declined and this petition stands dismissed with costs.” The order stated, “Ombudsman has no locus standi to challenge an order passed by the constitutional court that interprets its jurisdiction or powers under the law.” 
Therefore, the instant petition filed by the Wafaqi Mohtasib’s Secretariat was hopelessly misconceived and not maintainable, it added. 
The order stated, “Another way to look at it is that a neutral quasi judicial adjudicatory forum created under a statute cannot become a party to the proceedings brought before it. Such a forum is to simply to redress mal-administration by exercising its powers under the law.
The ombudsman by law and by design is not empowered to defend its decisions before a higher forum by becoming a party to the proceedings. This would totally tarnish its neutrality.”
The order further read, “Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the petition was filed by the ombudsman, as he was arrayed as a respondent in the writ petition. Still the question arises, whether the Ombudsman is an aggrieved person in the instant matter ? The answer to this question requires an understanding of the distinction between the two roles enjoyed by the Ombudsman under Order, 1983. One is personal, that relates to the terms and conditions of service of the Ombudsman; while the other is the neutral quasi-judicial institutional role (or statutory) of the Ombudsman to “redress and rectify” mal-administration. In the first case the Ombudsman can be (personally) aggrieved regarding any order that affects his terms and conditions of service under Order, 1983, as that would be affecting his rights to service under the law. However, in the second case, the ombudsman, cannot be said to be aggrieved, if the powers to redress mal-administration vested in him under the law are modified (enhanced or curtailed) by the Parliament or through interpretation of the constitutional court. Challenging the powers would be challenging the law and intent of the Parliament.
Ombudsman, being a creature of the statute, cannot challenge the powers vested in him by the legislature, however, the parties to the proceedings may bring such a challenge. The powers enjoyed by the Ombudsman cannot be confused with his rights under the law.”

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*‘No need for detailed verdict if SC upholds old order'*


SC says court must elaborate reasons if it reverses, modifies lower court's judgment

August 26, 2020










*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court has said there is no need to issue a detailed judgment in cases where the top court adopts reasoning of the lower courts while adjudicating an appeal.
“If the apex court, having examined the judgment challenged before it, is satisfied with its reasoning and conclusions and is of the view that it does not call for any interference, this court can simply endorse the judgment and adopt the reasoning of the court below.
"In such a case, retracing the same path travelled by the court below appears to be an unnecessary exercise and a waste of public time – time which can be allocated to other cases where the decisions of the courts below have been overturned or modified,” said an order authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.
The three-page order was issued after hearing of a review petition filed against August 1, 2019 order of a Supreme Court bench. One of the grounds for filing the review petition was that the previous SC order had not cited any reason for rejecting the appeal.
“We have not been able to take any exception to the reasoning of the impugned judgment [of the high court] and are of the view that it does not warrant any interference. Leave is, therefore, declined and these petitions are dismissed," said the SC's previous short order.
Upholding the SC's August 1, 2019 order, Justice Shah noted that a concise, simple order can suffice if the apex court does not find a reversible error in the judgment of the lower court.
The order, however, clarified that if the court is to reverse or modify the judgment of the court below, the reasons for the reversal or modification must be set forth.
“Nothing is cast in stone. Old practices evolve with changing times. Burgeoning population and the corresponding rapid increase in litigation require imaginative solutions.”
The order noted that courts all over the world have moved on to efficient time and case management techniques. It said the new approach is by no means a short-cut offensive to fair trial under Article 10-A of the Constitution nor does it in any manner undermine due process and fair-play.
“It is simply a creative way forward that spares the court from writing opinions where a mere adoption of a well-reasoned judgment of the court below through a short order serves the purpose adequately.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*Husband to pay Mehr in case of second marriage, says Supreme Court*


Sabah
August 27, 2020










ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday disposed of an appeal against immediate payment of Mehr from a husband to his wife.

The top court rejected the petition challenging the Peshawar High Court (PHC) decision and directed the applicant Jameel to immediately pay Mehr to his first wife Sajida Bibi. Muhammad Jameel married a second woman without the permission of his first wife. The five-page order was written by the Supreme Court Judge Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi. The case was heard by two-member bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial.

The husband has to pay Mehr to his first wife immediately in case of marrying for the second time, the court ordered while adding that the amount would be paid immediately even if the couple had agreed in the marriage documents to pay it afterwards.

The court further ordered that permission from the first wife or arbitration council would be mandatory for husband in case of a second marriage. The law regarding the second marriage is aimed at running the society’s affairs properly, the top court ruled adding that its violation could develop various complications.

The Supreme Court in its order said that it is now abundantly clear that the entire amount of dower fixed at the time of marriage whether prompt or deferred is immediately payable on account of second marriage. The petitioner, Muhammad Jamil, by entering into second marriage without seeking prior permission either from the existing wife Sajida Bibi or the Arbitration Council the dower even if it is termed deferred or prompt has become payable without any delay. Otherwise, the provision of section 6 of the Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961 is in consonance with the injunctions of Islam. 

The said provisions has not placed any restriction to contract second marriage, rather it only relates to seeking permission before entering into second marriage in order to regulate the structure of society as a whole. Any deviation from the provision of section 6 of Muslim Family Law Ordinance 1961 it might ensue a number of issues, which would frustrate the fabric of relationship within society, therefore, the judgment of the learned single bench of Peshawar High Court for immediate payment of dower (5 Tolas of gold) is quite in accordance with law. 

So far as recovery of maintenance allowance is concerned learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any good reason qualifying interference into the judgment impugned before us.
The learned High Court has rightly declined the prayer hence no other exception is called for. As a consequence this petition is dismissed. Leave to appeal is declined.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*Officials guilty of fraud can’t stay in govt service: Supreme Court*

Apex court says such corrupt people could in no circumstances be treated leniently



 Hasnaat Malik
August 29, 2020











Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed. 


*ISLAMABAD: *The country’s top court has ruled that the government officials who are found involved in embezzlement of the state property or money can never be allowed to continue in employment.

“The government properties and the government funds are not to be doled out by the government officials, either to private persons or to themselves and such conduct amounts to fraud with government.
“The person(s) committing fraud or embezzlement of the government property or money could in no circumstances be treated leniently in disciplinary proceedings and in appropriate cases, be allowed to continue in the service,” said a five-page order authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed.
The CJP – heading a division bench – issued the order on a petition filed against the Punjab Service Tribunal order to reinstate a senior revenue official, who had admitted that he illegally transferred government land measuring 270 kanals – situated in District Jhang – to private individuals.
A departmental inquiry had declared the official guilty and proposed his dismissal.

However, the Punjab Service Tribunal declared that the act of the revenue official was not misconduct and that the penalty of dismissal from service, was not commensurate with the gravity of the offence.
The tribunal had later converted the penalty imposed on the respondent by departmental authorities into forfeiture of two year’s approved service.
Setting aside the tribunal’s order, the apex court noted that its judgment was altogether misplaced – more particularly, when looked at from the point of view that the respondent had transferred/mutated government land in favour of private parties, causing huge loss to the government exchequer.

The order noted that the tribunal has for a considerable time been taking a lenient view of misconduct by government servants even where an employee of the department has admitted the commission of an offence constituting serious misconduct or the offence has been proved through inquiry.

“Despite this, the tribunal reduced the penalty imposed upon such an employee by the department, considering the same to be harsh and not commensurate with the gravity of the offence, without assigning any legally sustainable reasoning.


“[The tribunal only stated that it] enjoys “vast powers” under Section 5 of the Service Tribunals Act, 1973 to confirm, set aside, vary or modify orders passed by the departmental authorities.”
The court asked as to how vast are these powers and whether these powers are discretionary – totally unstructured and unlimited – and they could be exercised at the whims of the tribunal.The order said once misconduct is established, it is the prerogative of the department to decide on the quantum of punishment, out of the various penalties provided in law.

“Unless the tribunal finds exercise of such prerogative by the departmental authority to be perverse and totally disproportionate to the gravity of the offence/misconduct for which reasons have to be recorded, the penalty imposed by the departmental authorities cannot be interfered with.

“Such reasons must be valid and meet the standards of logical and judicial reasoning,” it added.
The court observed that the powers of the tribunal under Section 5 of the Punjab Service Tribunals Act, 1974 – to confirm, set aside, vary or modify orders appealed against – are neither discretionary nor unbridled.

“Such powers have to be exercised cautiously, carefully and with circumspection where the order imposing the penalty is wholly perverse or ex-facie so demonstratably disproportionate and excessive for the offence/misconduct, that to let it stand would be unfair, unjust and inequitable.”
It stated that where powers are exercised under section 5 ibid, detailed reasons must be recorded justifying such exercise which would withstand the test of judicial scrutiny by this court.
The tribunal has in this case reduced the penalty without much ado and no reasoning although the respondent was found guilty of misconduct by all forums in all departmental proceedings, it said.
The court noted that the order of the tribunal is self contradictory in excess of jurisdiction and devoid of any reasoning let alone cogent and legally acceptable.

“The impugned judgment of the tribunal can therefore not be sustained. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside. Consequently, the order passed against the respondent for his dismissal from service is restored,” it said.

The apex court also ordered its office to supply the copy of this order to the chairman as well as members of the Federal Service Tribunal and all the provincial service tribunals.

While hearing another case, the apex court on August 10 ordered the Punjab government to remove a member of the Punjab Service Tribunal for declaring taking ‘illegal gratification/bribe’ a ‘minor offence’.

A three-judge bench, also led by CJP Gulzar Ahmed, had issued a nine-page order on an appeal filed against the decision of the Punjab Service Tribunal Member-1 to restore service of a police official Muhammad Hanif who was found guilty of taking a bribe of Rs20,000.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court suspends SHC judgement declaring sugar commission, its report illegal*

Hearing of the case has been adjourned for a month


Hasnaat Malik
September 02, 2020







A file photo of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: EXPRESS


*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court (SC) suspended on Wednesday the Sindh High Court's (SHC) judgement that declared the sugar inquiry commission and its report illegal.

A three-member special judge bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed also issued notices to the respondents over the federal government's petition.
The hearing of the case has been adjourned for a month.

Last week, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Javed Khan, on behalf of the federal government, filed a petition against the ruling on August 17. He stated that the SHC quashed the fact-finding report as well as the notifications for the inquiry commission under the Pakistan Commissions of Inquiry Act, 2017.
The government’s petition maintained that the SHC quashed the fact-finding report and the notifications on technical grounds, as the summary for constituting the commission was initiated by the interior ministry rather than the Cabinet Division. The petition further stated that the notifications were published belatedly in the official gazette.

This was despite the fact that the summary for appointing all seven members of the commission was duly approved by the federal cabinet and none of the sugar manufacturers, including the respondents, ever did or could claim lack of knowledge of the proceedings of the commission.
The petition further maintained that the commission also fully interacted with the Pakistan Sugar Mills Association (PSMA), of which the respondent manufacturers were members. They could not show any prejudice whatsoever owing to the fact that the summary was initiated by the Interior Division, which in any case merged in the final approval of the cabinet, nor due to any delay in the publication of the notification in the gazette, the petition upheld.


“It is submitted with profound respect and humility that the bench grossly erred in law and facts and based the judgement on the completely unjustified assumption that the aggrieved party, in this case, is the group of manufacturers of sugar,” the petition said.
In a surprising move, the Sindh High Court had on August 17 quashed the sugar inquiry commission's report declaring it illegal.

A two-judge SHC bench led by Justice KK Agha announced the judgement , stating that the notification regarding the constitution of sugar commission was illegal.

The decision was, however, not to prevent authorities including the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) from proceeding against sugar mill owners in accordance with law, and without any reference to or reliance on the report.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

*Judicial system of country fully codified by laws: CJP*


Says legal system had evolved through indigenous experiences


APP
September 04, 2020











*ISLAMABAD: *Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed on Thursday observed that the judicial system of the country was fully codified by laws and its practices were also governed by rules and regulations.

The top judge made these remarks while addressing the participants of National Security and War Course 2021 during their visit to the Supreme Court.
Welcoming the participants, the chief justice said that the main purpose of the war course participants’ visit to the apex court was to get an orientation on the judicial system of the country.

He said like other countries of the world, Pakistan also had its own judicial system.

“The judicial system in Pakistan, as it is now, had its own history of evolution and was rooted in the times of Hindu rule of India, Muslim rule of India and the British colonial period,” he said.

The top judge noted that after the end of British rule in the year 1947 and the creation of the independent state of Pakistan, the judicial system had evolved further through indigenous experiences.

“Indeed, this process of refinement is ongoing and shall keep continuing,” he said.

Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed observed that as an introduction, it was essential to mention some basic features having relevance to the judiciary in Pakistan.
Pakistan is a federal republic known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and Article 1 of the constitution provides for the same, he said.

"It has four federating territories that are the provinces of Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Sindh, alongside the Islamabad Capital Territory. Article 175 of the constitution deals with the judicature and provides that there shall be a Supreme Court of Pakistan and a high court for each province and the Islamabad Capital Territory, and such other courts that may be established by law," he said.

Furthermore, by a Presidential Order No1 of 1980, Chapter 3A was added to the constitution by which the Federal Shariat Court was constituted.

“The most likely way of explaining the judicial system of Pakistan, as regards ordinary cases, and I say ordinary cases for the reason that there are also special courts and tribunals created by law to deal with special cases and their hierarchy is also provided by such laws. There is a four-tier judicial system operating in Pakistan, both for ordinary civil and ordinary criminal cases," he said.

The chief justice noted that the lowest rank of civil courts was called the court of a civil judge.
He said that in this court, all civil suits originate except in the territory of Karachi, where the high court had also been given original civil jurisdiction to try suits having pecuniary value of Rs15 million and above for the territory of Karachi.

He said that the suits valued at less than these pecuniary values in the territory of Karachi originate in the court of a civil judge.
The second tier is the court of district judge, which exercises revisional and appellate jurisdiction against the judgments, orders and decrees passed by the courts of civil judge.

The third tier is the high court, which exercises revisional and appellate jurisdiction over the judgments, orders and decrees passed by the district judges.
The fourth tier is the Supreme Court, which is the final court of appeal against the judgments, orders and decrees passed by the High Courts.

The top judge observed that the judgments, orders and decrees passed by the Supreme Court were enforceable throughout the country and where it was to be executed in a province it was executed by the high court of the said province.





tribune.com.pk


----------



## ghazi52

*Apex court allows company to hire counsel in WD case*


The Frontier Post
September 8, 2020

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the private construction company to hire a counsel in Winder Dam (WD) case.

A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case regarding construction of Winder Dam in Lasbeela, Balochistan.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Mushir Alam said that the court could not stop the national project of dams added that stopping construction of the dam would increase its cost.
The CEO of a private construction company pleaded the court to grant four weeks time to hire a counsel in the matter.

Justice Mushir Alam said if the cost of the project increases, the company would have to pay.
Justice Qazi Amin said that stopping work on the dam would increase Rs 10 billion plan to Rs 50 billion.
He said that the auction process of the project should be transparent and warned that no one would be spared if the auction process went wrong.

He remarked unfortunately, only 60% of the total amount was spent on such projects.
Later, the court adjourned hearing of the case till Wednesday.
The Balochistan High Court had ordered for open auction for the construction of the dam.
The Balochistan government had challenged the decision of the Balochistan High Court in the Supreme Court.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC allows 2-month time to KP crusher plants to meet rules*


The Frontier Post
September 18, 2020

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Thursday accepted the petition, seeking installation of power crushers plant in Kh-uber Pakhtoonkhwa (KP) for hearing and accorded two-month time to the plants to meet the necessary rules and standards.

A two-member bench of the apex court, comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Munib Akhtar, heard the case and issued notices to the respondents.

During the course of proceedings, the court observed that serious points of environmental pollution had been raised in the Suraj Gali area of KP.

The bench also observed that new amendments to the rules were made without data or research. The decision of the High Court was also accurate and the grounds were appropriate, it added.


The Advocate General KP said that the first power crusher plants were regulated in 1995. Plants could not be installed to one kilometer from schools, colleges, hospitals, canals, sensitive areas and human populations, he added. He said that the impact of crushers on the environment was also taken into account. There were three points to consider when installing power crushers, he added. He said that by law, noise pollution must be up to 55 decibels and vibration of plants should not exceed 3.5 mm per second.

The effects of environmental pollution were reviewed in the third point, he added. He said that according to the new law, a limit of 500 meters had been fixed in the urban area while in the rural area, permission was given to install plants after 300 meters.

He said that the KP government formed a cabinet committee to review the distances of the crushers in 2017. The committee proposed a boundary of 500 meters for the urban area and 300 meters for the rural area, he added. He said that no plant could be set up without the permission of the gas pipeline company and the archeology department. He said that the Peshawar High Court annulled new amendments.

Justice Munib Akhtar said that the new rules did not define canals, cemeteries, roads, sensitive areas, pipelines and others. The counsel replied that dictionary meanings would be taken for all these.
He said that the purpose of keeping a distance of 300 and 500 meters was only to protect the environment from damage.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that according to the Environmental Protection Agency, residents could have respiratory ailments.

The counsel said that all environment related complaints had been forwarded to the Environmental Tribunal. He said that the high court annulled the rules without considering the quality of the rules.
Justice Munib Akhtar said that the PHC pointed out that these rules were unfair and the rights of local people were being affected. If the high court was saying this, then what could the Supreme Court do, he asked.

The counsel said that KP Environmental Act meant for environmental issues.
Justice Munib Akhtar said that if the environmental agency fixed two kilometres distance and the rules allowed five hundred meters distance, it would overlap. The high court had stated that old rules were fine, he added.


The counsel said that the provisional government had stopped the crushers from working who were not following guidelines.
Later, hearing of the case was adjourned till date in office.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC stays release of Daniel Pearl murder accused for a week*
Notices issued to all respondents after court grants Pearls' parents, Sindh govt leave to appeal


Hasnaat MalikSeptember 28, 2020






Slain American journalist Daniel Pearl. 


*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court (SC) restrained concerned Sindh authorities on Monday from releasing Daniel Pearl murder accused for one week.

The Sindh High Court (SHC), on April 2, had commuted the death sentence of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh – convicted for kidnapping and murdering Pearl in 2002 – to seven years, and acquitted three others who were serving life terms in the case – almost two decades after they were found guilty and jailed.

The detention period of the accused will end on September 30.

The three-member judge bench of the apex court led by Justice Mushir Alam while granting Sindh government and Pearl’s parents' petitions leave to appeal against the SHC judgment issued notices to all the respondents in acquittal pleas.

During the proceedings, the counsel for Pearl's parents, Faisal Siddiqui, argued that accused Omar Sheikh wrote a letter to the SHC Registrar, but the high court ignored his confession in the letter, he said.

"All the parties, in this case, have filed an appeal against the decision of the high court,” Siddiqui pleaded. “We want the trial court's decision to be reinstated. Evidence suggests the abduction was for ransom. The court's query regarding the element of conspiracy is correct,” the counsel stated.

He said that the confessional statements of the two accused prove the murder to be a conspiracy. The statements are self-explanatory, he added.

Earlier, speaking to Sindh government's counsel, Farooq H Naek, member of the apex court bench Justice Qazi Amin asked whether he would ask for the sentences to be suspended if the court submits the appeals for a preliminary hearing.

“I will request for the Sindh High Court's decision to be suspended,” Naek replied.

Justice Amin suggested putting Sheikh’s name on the Exit Control List (ECL) as well as Schedule-B, that would bind him to appear before the court.

Allowing the appeals challenging the SHC's decision for a preliminary hearing, the court adjourned the hearing for a week.

In August, the SHC had dismissed a petition challenging the extended detention of the men accused of kidnapping and murdering the Wall Street Journal journalist, terming it inadmissible.

The petition, filed in the SHC, sought to declare the notification issued on April 2 on the second extension of the detention of the men acquitted in the 2002 kidnapping and murder null and void.
The accused have been detained under Section 11 EEEE (preventive detention for inquiry) of the Anti-Terrorism Act.

The first notification was issued the day the men were acquitted and the second one three months after they completed their detention period.


*Pearl’s murder*

Pearl, 38, was the South Asia bureau chief for The Wall Street Journal when he was abducted in Karachi in January 2002 while researching links between militants in Pakistan and Richard C Reid - also known as the ‘shoe bomber’ for trying to detonate a shoe bomb while on a flight from Paris to Miami in 2001.

Pearl’s wife Mariane Pearl, a US national who was living in Karachi’s Zamzama area, wrote a letter to the Artillery Maidan police on February 2, 2002, stating that her husband disappeared on January 23, 2002.
She said she received an email from the abductors, saying that he has been abducted in retaliation for the imprisonment of Pakistani men by the US government in Cuba and other complaints.
A graphic video showing Pearl’s decapitation was delivered to the US consulate in Karachi nearly a month after he was kidnapped.
After this, a case was filed against the suspects and 23 witnesses were produced in the case by the prosecution. Sheikh was arrested in February 2002.
An investigation, led by Pearl’s friend and former Wall Street Journal colleague Asra Nomani and a Georgetown University professor, claimed that the reporter was murdered by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks, not Omar Sheikh.
Mohammed — better known as KSM — was arrested in Pakistan in 2003 and is being held at Guantanamo Bay.
On April 2, 2020, the SHC heard their appeals against the sentence after 18 years and acquitted Sheikh, Saqib and Naseem. It commuted Sheikh’s death sentence to seven years and fined him Rs2 million.
Sheikh has already spent 18 years in prison on death row and his seven-year sentence for kidnapping was counted as time served.
Pearl’s parents and the Sindh government, however, filed appeals against the Sindh High Court’s order. On June 29, the Supreme Court dismissed the Sindh’s government appeal, asking for a stay order in the SHC verdict in the Daniel Pearl murder case.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC acquits accused on benefit of doubt*

The high court commuted the death sentence into life imprisonment

APP
October 08, 2020

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday acquitted a life sentence of a convict giving him the benefit of doubt. The trial court awarded capital punishment to accused Tanveer over murder of his brother Asif and sister-in law Shumaila Bibi in Chakwal area in 2011. The high court commuted the death sentence into life imprisonment.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik and comprised Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Mazahar Alam Khan Miankhel, heard the case. During the course of proceedings, state counsel Abid Majeed said no one was following Shumaila Bibi’s murder case. 

According to the first information report, there was an illicit relationship between the accused’s sister-in-law and Asif Mahmood, he added. He said Shumaila Bibi’s husband was abroad. The apex court acquitted the accused giving him the benefit of doubt.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 8th, 2020.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC acquits accused on benefit of doubt*

The high court commuted the death sentence into life imprisonment


APP
October 08, 2020







*ISLAMABAD:*The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday acquitted a life sentence of a convict giving him the benefit of doubt. The trial court awarded capital punishment to accused Tanveer over murder of his brother Asif and sister-in law Shumaila Bibi in Chakwal area in 2011.

The high court commuted the death sentence into life imprisonment. A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik and comprised Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Mazahar Alam Khan Miankhel, heard the case. During the course of proceedings, state counsel Abid Majeed said no one was following Shumaila Bibi’s murder case. 

According to the first information report, there was an illicit relationship between the accused’s sister-in-law and Asif Mahmood, he added. He said Shumaila Bibi’s husband was abroad. The apex court acquitted the accused giving him the benefit of doubt.

_Published in The Express Tribune, October 8th, 2020._


----------



## ghazi52

*FGEHA land acquisition verdict due today*

SC to decide case of land acquisition from locals on cheaper rates


Hasnaat Malik
October 08, 2020


*ISLAMABAD: *After a passage of eight months, the Supreme Court will announce the long-awaited judgment on acquisition of land by the Federal Government Employees Housing Authority (FGEHA) in sectors F-14 and F-15 from locals on cheaper rates.

In 2017, the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) incumbent Chief Justice Athar Minallah had decided the petitions filed by the locals against the acquisition of their land by FGEHA and asked the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to take over the development of housing schemes in the areas and to judiciously dispense the plots after developing the two sectors.

The high court had also scrapped a federal government housing scheme in sectors F-14 and F-15 of the federal capital. Judges, powerful bureaucrats, influential lawyers and journalists were amongst the beneficiaries of the scheme.

Later, a division bench of the IHC dismissed appeal filed by FGEHA against the verdict.

The matter was then taken up by the Supreme Court as former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar allowed an appeal against the high court division bench’s order and suspended the high court's rulings.
However, as many as six judges of the top court recused themselves from hearing the case for different reasons. Of the six judges, at least three judges preferred not to adjudicate on the matter as they had applied for plots in the scheme.
According to the FGEHA’s list of applicants and allottees, available on its website, seven of the serving judges of the apex court had applied for plots in the scheme.

A four-judge special bench, led by Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Umar Ata Bandial while comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Ijazul Ahsan reserved judgment on January 14.

Hassan Mann Advocate, who pleaded this matter on behalf of affectees of land acquisition at the IHC, said the real issue is that the land is being acquired for benefit of a privileged class. However, this land could fetch more than Rs500 billion to exchequer, if auctioned on commercial basis.

He said: “This is a case concerning public revenue. Instead of generating revenue for public exchequer, the FGEHA is usurping the sovereign privilege of eminent domain to line the pockets of its members.”

The beneficiaries of FGEHA scheme are serving or retired officers and employees of federal ministries, divisions, attached departments… judges of the superior courts – the SC, all high courts, Azad Kashmir Supreme Court and the Chief Court and the Supreme Appellate Court of Gilgit-Baltistan and the Federal Shariat Court, he said.

The advocate continued that the beneficiaries also include serving and retired employees of autonomous and semi-autonomous bodies, public sector corporations under the control of federal government, journalists, media workers, lawyers, employees of housing authority, Ministry of Housing and Works and constitutional bodies.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC upholds high court verdict in land case*

The Frontier Post
October 15, 2020
F.P. Report


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday dismissed a petition filed by Abdul Haye regarding transfer of 57 kanal land to his name.

A two-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Amin-Ud-Din Khan heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, Justice Qazi Faez Isa expressed his concerns over the non-serious behaviour of the people regarding the sisters share in the property as per Sharia.

He said he had never heard of a brother giving his sister a gift of land and brothers were getting double share in the property.

Advocate Rafaqat Hussain Shah, counsel for the petitioner, said the Tehsildar himself had stated that the woman had appeared before him to record her statement for the transfer of land.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa said the land was transferred nine years ago and how did the Tehsildar remember the incident?

He asked the counsel if the Tehsildar did 10 to 20 cases a day, how could he remember the woman that she was the same one.

The court dismissed the petition relating to the land transfer dispute. In Telangana in 1996, the sister gifted her 57 kanals of land to her only brother after the death of her father. The civil court ruled the gift was legal. The district court had quashed the decision of the civil court.

The high court upheld the decision of the district court.

The supreme court also upheld the decision of the high court and dismissed the petition.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC to take up petition against SHC appointments*


Three-judge special bench to hear two constitutional petitions on Monday

Hasnaat Malik
October 17, 2020


ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed has constituted a special bench to hear constitutional petitions, requesting the court to revoke all appointments made in the Sindh High Court (SHC) and the district judiciary in the province since 2017.

The three-judge special bench – comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel – will take up two constitutional petitions on Monday.

The first petitioner, Ghulam Sarwar Qureshi Advocate, pleaded that under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the apex court should form a joint investigation team comprising senior judges of the SHC to investigate the appointments made since 2017.

The petitioner asked the court to seek the record of all appointments from the SHC registrar, the SHC chief justice and the government of Sindh.

He also requested the court to issue an order for the de-notification of all appointments and to conduct an inquiry against the SHC chief justice, registrar and judges of district courts for violating the law.

The petition sought the court’s directions to restrain the SHC chief justice from making appointments until the case was decided. The SHC chief justice, the SHC registrar, the Sindh government as well as the federal governments were nominated as respondents in the application.

The Sindh Bar Council (SBC) has recently filed a petition challenging the elevation of three judges of the Lahore High Court (LHC) to the apex court. Earlier, the bar council had raised serious questions about “out-of-turn elevation” of judges to the Supreme Court.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC accepts NAB appeal for filing reference against KP govt employee*


The Frontier Post
October 19, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday accepted the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) appeal against Peshawar High Court’s verdict about filing of more than one reference against a government employee.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah asked how could more than one reference be filed against an officer? The NAB made three references to the steps taken in one year, he added.

He said that the NAB filed another reference when bail was granted two years later.

The NAB prosecutor said that the law did not prohibit filing of second reference.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah said that the Peshawar High Court ruled that there should not be no new reference.
Justice Yahya Afridi asked did the NAB also issue warrants against accused on every reference?


Justice Sajjad Ali Shah said that the NAB filed three references on three different steps.

Justice Bandial said that the NAB should ensure that the authority to file a reference was not misused.

Later hearing of the case was adjourned till date in office. The NAB had filed three references against 25 accused, including DG of PDA, on corruption charges.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC acquits murder accused after 14 years*


The Frontier Post 
November 30, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday acquitted murder accused Khadim Hussain giving him benefit of doubt.

A trial court awarded capital punishment to Khadim Hussain over kidnapping, raping and killing a 10-year-old boy Mudassar Azam. The Shariat Court also maintained the trial court verdict. Mudassar Azam, a 10-year-old boy, was abducted in 2006 in the Bani area of Rawalpindi and his dead body was recovered from Golra police station area of Islamabad.

A five-member Shariat Appellate Bench of the apex court headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Dr Muhammad Al-Ghazali Ad-hoc member-I and Dr Muhammad Khalid Masood Ad-hoc member-II heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, Advocate Akram Gondal counsel for the accused said that his client was not nominated in the First Information Report (FIR).

He said that evidence was made against his client after his arrest.

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused due to lack of evidence as prosecution failed to prove the case.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court seeks a report on petrol pumps established on state land*


The Frontier Post
December 2, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Chairman National Highway Authority (NHA) to submit a concise report over establishment of petrol pumps on the government land. 
A two-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan heard the case pertaining to leasing of state land for establishment of petrol pumps.


During the course of proceedings, the court also sought copies of the lease and details of the received funds should be submitted within 4 weeks.


The court also sought explanation regarding the revenue received and spent by the NHA. The court also asked whether petrol pumps were leased to the NHA employees.

Salman counsel for NHA said that the NHA could lease land along highways. The NHA also has the authority to issue licenses for setting up petrol pumps, he added.
Justice Ijaz said if all the authority was with the NHA, then what was the use of provincial government ownership?

The Additional Advocate General Punjab said that the Punjab government had withdrawn lease of land authority from NHA.

The Chief Justice said that there were several petrol pumps with each other in Karachi and Hyderabad. The NHA was violating the rules for setting up petrol pumps, he added. He said that petrol pumps could be leased to NHA employees or relatives.

Later, hearing of the case was adjourned for four weeks


----------



## ghazi52

*SC adjourns bail plea of accused allegedly involved in corruption*


The Frontier Post 
December 15, 2020


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned hearing of a bail plea filed by former Secretary Union Council Rawat Javed Chaudhary till after winter vacations.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the bail plea.

During the course of proceedings, Advocate Shah Khawar, counsel for the accused said that his client was in jail for last 18 months while the Assistant Commissioner was moving freely.

He said no co-accused was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for being a government official.

He pleaded before the court to grant bail to his client.

Justice Mushir Alam said that the trial had begun and witnesses were being called.

The NAB prosecutor said delay in indictment and witnesses was due to the accused.

Shah Khawar said that the convicts were living in the same flats that were ordered to be confiscated.

Justice Mushir Alam said that the court would review progress of the trial after winter holidays. If there was no progress, the court would consider granting bail to the accused, he added.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC to hear presidential reference on Senate polls on Monday*

The Frontier Post / 
December 29, 2020



ISLAMABAD (TLTP): The presidential reference seeking guidance on holding the upcoming Senate polls through show of hand will be heard by the Supreme Court on January 4 (Monday).

A five-judge larger ben-ch, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi, will take up the reference, the SC said on Tuesday.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC wants plea maintainability addressed in Senate polls: *

Nasir Iqbal
05 Jan 2021

 





The maintainability of the presidential reference seeking an opinion on “open ballot” for the Senate elections came into question on Monday when Justice Yahya Afridi of the Supreme Court wondered why the court should jump into the controversy. — Photo courtesy SC website



ISLAMABAD: The maintainability of the presidential reference seeking an opinion on “open ballot” for the Senate elections came into question on Monday when Justice Yahya Afridi of the Supreme Court wondered why the court should jump into the controversy.

“There is a question of maintainability. Why should the Supreme Court enter into the controversy when it should be kept away instead of dragging it into the political arena,” observed Justice Afridi, a member of the five-judge bench hearing the reference through which President Dr Arif Alvi had sought an answer to a question whether the condition of secret ballot under Article 226 of the Constitution applies to the Senate elections or not.



> Quetta lawyer Hadi Shakeel appointed to assist court in the matter




Attorney General (AG) Khalid Jawed Khan, however, recalled that the Supreme Court had already dealt with the maintainability issue at length while deciding the 2005 reference on the Hasba Bill instituted by the then government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

The bench ordered issuing notices to the advocate generals of the four provinces and the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) as well as the National Assembly Speaker, the Senate Chairman, speakers of the four provincial assemblies and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

The court appointed Hadi Shakeel, a lawyer from Quetta, as friend of the court to assist it in the matter.

It ordered publication of notices in newspapers for general information and to solicit opinion of individuals interested in giving their viewpoint.

The court asked the AGP and the four advocate generals to submit their written synopses when hearing resumes on Jan 11.

The reference was filed last month soon after the cabinet decided to hold elections for seats of the upper house which will fall vacant after the retirement of 52 members of the 104-member Senate on March 11.

The cabinet had decided on Dec 15 to hold Senate elections in February as well as to invoke advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on open voting.

At the outset, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan observed that the president was asking the court to distinguish between elections held under the constitution and those held under the electoral law. Except for the elections of the prime minister and the chief ministers, other elections were not held in accordance with the constitution, he added.

Justice Ahsan said parliament was empowered to amend any law if there was a recurring element of horse trading or floor crossing.

The attorney general explained that the government had moved a bill in the National Assembly, but observed that “judges always see things in a straight manner”. Development of consensus was a step subsequent to interpretation of the question which the government had put before the court, Mr Jawed added.

When Justice Ahsan observed that the court would like to see a parliamentary debate on the law that governs the Senate elections, the AGP replied that he had gone through the entire document but could not find any word about debate since the provision was added through the 18th amendment and was a part of Article 226 of the Constitution.

The government’s reference argued that the condition of secret ballot referred to in Article 226 was applicable to elections for the office of the president, speaker and deputy speaker of the National Assembly, chairman and deputy chairman of the Senate, speakers and deputy speakers of the provincial assemblies, but not to elections for senators as the process was governed not by the Constitution but by the Elections Act 2017.

At the fag end of the proceedings, Justice Yahya Afridi again reminded the AGP that he should address the maintainability issue of the reference in his synopsis to be placed before the court.

The reference emphasised that the requirement of secret ballot for Senate elections was not a constitutional provision. Instead, it was only a statutory provision — Section 122 (6) of the ’17 Elections Act. This can be amended by an act of parliament or through an ordinance under Article 89 of the Constitution.

The reference contended that open ballot would help ensure respect for the voter’s choice and desire, strengthen political parties by infusing them with discipline — a prerequisite for parliamentary democracy.

The reference explained that the question of open ballot for Senate elections had arisen because vote buying had damaged the sanctity of the exercise. Every Senate election since 1985 had set off questions about sanctity and genuineness, according to the reference.


_Published in Dawn, January 5th, 2021_


----------



## ghazi52

*SC orders functionality of 30 new accountability courts in a month*

The Frontier Post
January 5, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the federal government to make functional 30 new accountability courts within a month across the country.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar while hearing a corruption case in Lakhra Power Plant took notice of the vacant post of a permanent law secretary and directed the federal government to make appointment on the position.

During the course of proceedings, the Chief Justice said that the Law Ministry could not be run on adhoc basis.

He also directed the government to make functional 30 new accountability courts and asked the reasons for delay.

The Additional Attorney General said that the finance ministry and the establishment division had given approval while the recruitment process for staff would commence from January 11.

Discussing the Lakhra power plant case, Syed Haider Asghar Prosecutor General NAB said that 18 witnesses out of 29 had recorded their statements in the case.

He said that the NAB would not record the statements of seven witnesses.

Out of 29 hearings in the Accountability Court so far, NAB had taken only one adjournment, he added.

He said that the accused repeatedly demanded adjournment.

The apex court directed the Accountability Court Karachi to decide the Lakhra Power Plant corruption case in this month.

The court sought progress reports from the NAB and the government and adjourned hearing till second week of February.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC raises question on motorways security following rise in rape cases*







https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/web-desk
*Web Desk*
January 05, 2021


Supreme Court (SC) has raised questions on Tuesday over the security condition on motorways following rise in rape cases.

As per details, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed has condemned the mishap of raping a Christian girl in front of her family on Lahore-Sheikhupura Motorway.

Moreover, the top judge has sought report from the Punjab government on the recently held two rape incidents on motorway.

Meanwhile, the court was also informed that Christian community in Lahore’s Khadim Colony was tortured for not allowing to capture pictures of their girls.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court wants stronger, brave NAB*




> Fake bank accounts case, Justice Bandial says court not satisfied with performance of watchdog, Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi says NAB did not have power to act on its own | Why NAB gave time to main accused till February 15, asks Justice Sajjad Ali Shah








https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/agencies
*Agencies*
January 07, 2021

ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday accepted the post-arrest bail plea of Dr Dinshaw Hoshang Anklesaria, the main accused in the fake bank accounts case.

The three-member SC bench comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, however, directed Dr Dinshaw to cooperate with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in investigations and barred him from leaving the country.

The apex court, however, rejected the bail petition of co-accused Jamil Baloch, director of the Karachi Development Authority (KDA).

According to NAB, Dr Dinshaw, an accountant of Park Lane Estate Company and advisor to the Sindh chief minister had illegally got allotted an amenity plot belonging to Bagh Ibne Qasim Karachi to the Bahria Town, in connivance with Jamil Baloch causing over Rs 100 billion loss to the national exchequer. Bahria Town has constructed its Icon Tower over the plot.

Both Dr Dinshaw and Jamil Baloch had been in NAB custody in the fake bank accounts case. During the course of proceedings, the NAB prosecutor said the Bureau would not oppose bail to Dr Dinshaw, 

However, it would oppose the bail pleas of government officials.

Dr Dinshaw’s granted post-arrest bail, Co-accused’s bail petition rejected

He said the Bureau had asked Zain Malik of Bahria Town to submit a no-objection certificate (NoC) over his plea bargain application till February 15, and in case of failure to do so, action would be taken against him.
Justice Bandial said the court was not satisfied with the performance of NAB. It wanted the Bureau stronger, and it should show bravery and moral courage, he added. Law should be applied equally to all. 

Accountability should be carried out in accordance with the law, but NAB seemed to be under pressure from all quarters.

If the Bureau did not act in accordance with the law, the court would take action, he added.

Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi said NAB did not have the power to act on its own. Only with amendment in Section 9, it could do whatever it wanted, he added.

He said NAB did not catch the big corrupt people while small thieves were put in jail for five years. The Bureau did not arrest the real culprit involved in corruption scams.

The prosecutor general replied that NAB did not work on its own as it produced the accused before the Accountability Court within 24 hours of their arrest.

Justice Naqvi observed that the court knew that the cases dealt with by NAB were not ordinary criminal cases. NAB arrested government officials first but not those against whom it had evidence of their wrongdoings. The NAB prosecutor said there was no pressure on the Bureau and no one stopped it from working.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah remarked that NAB knew that it was difficult for Zain Malik to produce the NoC. If Zain Malik did so then NAB would initiate trial of the NOC’s issuers.

The NAB prosecutor replied that if the NOC was produced, its issuer would also be included in the lawsuit. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah asked as to why NAB had given time to the main accused till February 15.
Justice Bandial said the bench had gone through the NAB’s performance report. The Bureau had collected billions of rupees, he added.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court to hear Senate elections’ references today*

The Frontier Post 
January 10, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court has constituted a five-judge larger bench to commence hearing on a presidential reference seeking the court’s opinion whether ‘open ballot’ for Senate elections would help acknowledge the respect of choice and desire of the citizen voters on Monday (January 11).

The five-member larger bench would be headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising of Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi.

Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan would represent President Dr Arif Alvi.

On December 23, President Arif Alvi, after approving the proposal of the prime minister, had filed a 11-page reference in the Supreme Court under Article 186 of the Constitution relating to the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and sought its opinion on holding the upcoming elections for the upper house of the Parliament through open ballot and show of hands.

At the previous hearing on January 04, the apex court had issued notices to the advocates general of all four provinces and the Islamabad Capital Territory, the speakers of all provincial assemblies, speaker of the National Assembly, Chairman Senate and the Election Commission of Pakistan directing them to submit written synopses to the court. Any other party interested in being a part of the case could also file petitions in the Supreme Court, the order said.

The court also directed that notices be published in newspapers to seek the public’s opinion on the matter. The apex court also asked senior advocate, Hadi Shakeel, from Quetta to appear and assist the court as amicus curiae.

According to replies submitted by the provinces of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa, both the provinces backed presidential reference, seeking guidance from the Supreme Court on the federal government’s plan to amend the Election Act 2017 through an ordinance to allow the use of open-ballot at the upcoming Senate elections.

“It is the considered view of the Punjab that the reference in question may kindly be answered in the affirmative so that by undertaking necessary remedial statutory action, the Election Act 2017 is amended and enable the elections to the Senate to be held through open ballot,” pleads Advocate General of Punjab Ahmad Awais in a rejoinder.

“This provincial government supports the reference No. 01, 2020, sent by the President to this Honourable Court,” said the KP advocate general in his reply.


----------



## ghazi52

*Justice Ijaz says Parliament makes laws and the SC interprets them*

The Frontier Post 
January 14, 2021

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned hearing on Presidential reference seeking an opinion on open balloting for the upcoming Senate elections till Monday.

A five-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the reference.

During the course of proceedings, Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Jawed Khan said that he wanted to start his arguments with questions from Justice Yahya Afridi.

Answering a question about not sending the issue to the Parliament, the Attorney General said that the federation had approached the Supreme Court for its opinion.

He said that the the government’s case was to interpret Article 226.

Justice Ijaz said that Parliament made laws and the Supreme Court interpreted them.

The Attorney General said that the Supreme Court had ruled 23 years ago that decisions should be made without distinguishing between political and non-political questions. Every country had a Supreme Court or a Constitutional Court to interpret constitutional matters, he added.

He said that Pakistan’s Supreme Court was the constitutional court. In many countries, including Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and the United States, the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution in constitutional and political matters, he added.

He said if political matters prevailed over constitutional matters, then the court avoided these matters. The Supreme Court had also interpreted political issues several times, he added.

He said that the Supreme Court had often referred political matters back to Parliament.

The Chief Justice asked the AGP to inform where procedure for holding Senate elections was written in the law?

The AGP replied that the Election Act 2017 contained the responsibilities of the Election Commission and the procedure for holding elections to the National and Provincial Assemblies.

Justice Ijaz asked where was the procedure for Senate elections mentioned in the Election Act 2017?
The Attorney General said that the complete procedure for Senate elections was mentioned in chapter 7 of the Election Act 2017. Section 26 of the Act dealt with Senate elections.

Justice Yahya Afridi said that the section 26 mentioned secret ballot for the election of senators.
The AGP said that Senate elections were held under the law, not under the constitution.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court defines ‘poast’ in clear terms*


Says not all parts of poppy plant can be called opium


Hasnaat Malik
January 23, 2021







Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: AFP/FILE


*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court has defined the term “poast” or opium while hearing an appeal of a man convicted by lower courts for possessing a sack full of opium poppy.

"Poast is the name given to that part of a poppy plant which has the shape of a basket, sack or pouch and it contains the seeds of such a plant. In some parts of this country this natural pouch of the poppy plant is also known as doda,” said Justice Mazhar Ali Akbar Naqvi in a 6-page verdict on the appeal.

Justice Naqvi noted that Section 2(t) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act (CNSA), 1997 defines “opium” as the poppy straw, that is to say, all parts of the poppy plant (Papaver Somniferum or any other species of Papaver) after mowing, other than the seeds.

According to the CNSA, the spontaneously coagulated juice of capsules of poppy – which has not been submitted to any manipulations other than those necessary for packing and transport – is also opium.

“[Under Section 2(t) of the CNSA, opium is also] any mixture, with or without natural materials, of any of the above forms of opium, but does not include any preparation containing not more than 0.2 per cent of morphine,” stated the verdict.

The judge noted that as per the definition clause of the CNSA, 1997 after mowing, all parts of the poppy plant except seeds are considered to be poppy straw.

He referred to two of the SC orders which declared that it is only the basket, sack or pouch (doda) excluding seeds, which contains narcotic substance and that poppy straw may not necessarily be “poast” because poppy straw can be any other part of the mowed poppy plant as well, excluding the seeds.

The court said it has been seen that often stems and leaves of the poppy plants are used as animal food.

"The plant can reach the height of about 1-5 meters (3-16 feet). Poppy straw is derived from the plant Papaver Somniferum, which has been cultivated in many countries of Europe and Asia for centuries. This has medicinal impact as well, which is largely used as a tonic for wellness of the nervous system".

The court said the purpose of poppy cultivation is actually the production of poppy seeds. The latter is used as food stuff and as a raw material for manufacturing poppy-seed oil, which is used for making various varnishes, paints and soaps etc.


*The case*

Police registered a case against petitioner Zulfiqar on October 20, 2007 under Section 9 (c) of the CNSA, 1997 in Faisalabad after they apprehended him from his house with a sack full of bhukki/poast.

There was 15kg of poast in the bag. Out of the 15kg, 500 grams was separated for chemical analysis. The report of the chemical examiner was positive. The trial court on August 28, 2009 sentenced Zulfiqar to life imprisonment. The Lahore High Court (LHC) also upheld his life imprisonment.

The SC asked as to what actually was recovered from the petitioner. “Was it only the doda/basket/pouch or it was the whole plant with stems and flowers?” It noted that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than 13 years and his remaining sentence is less than two years.

"For what has been discussed above, we while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, reduce the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to him into what he has already undergone.

“The petitioner shall be released from jail forthwith, unless detained in any other case. This jail petition is accordingly converted into appeal and partly allowed," the order concluded.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC to hear Daniel Pearl murder case appeal on Thursday*


The bench will hear the plea seeking suspension of the SHC's judgment regarding acquitting/releasing the accused in Pearl's murder case.


APP 
24 Jan 2021









ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has fixed hearing of the Daniel Pearl murder case for Thursday (January 28).

Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed constituted a three-judge bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising of Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Yahya Afridi to hear the Sindh government and the appeal of Daniel Pearl's parents against the Sindh High Court's (SHC) judgment.

The bench will hear the plea seeking suspension of the SHC's judgment regarding acquitting/releasing the accused in Pearl's murder case.

On April 2, 2020, the SHC had commuted the death sentence of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh - the man convicted of kidnapping and murdering American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 - to a seven-year sentence.

The SHC had also acquitted three others who had been awarded life imprisonment in the case.
The slain journalist's parents had approached the Supreme Court against the Sindh High Court’s verdict.
Two criminal petitions have been filed by a lawyer Faisal Siddiqi on behalf of Pearl's parents - Ruth Pearl and Judie Pearl- against the acquittal and release of the four accused.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court seeks details of wealth tax case against Sharifs*

Directs FBR’s counsel to submit status of appeals filed by the Sharif family


Our Correspondent
January 25, 2021







Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. PHOTO: FILE


*ISLAMABAD :*The Supreme Court on Monday directed the counsel for the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to submit details over the status of appeals filed by the Sharif family against the levy of wealth tax.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar, heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, the counsel said that the FBR issued a notice of additional tax to the Sharif family over late payment.

The Sharif family challenged the notice in the Lahore High Court (LHC), he added.

Justice Bandial asked the counsel when did the Sharif family file the application for tax refund?

Justice Shah said that the FBR had issued the first notice to the Sharif family in 1997, and then issued the notice of additional tax after five years in 2002. “Why did the FBR keep waiting for five years?” he asked.

Justice Akhtar asked the FBR’s counsel to inform the court about the status of appeals filed by the Sharif family against levy of wealth tax. He said that it could be possible that the Tax Appellant Authority might have decided in favour of the Sharif family, adding that the Sharif family filed a petition in the LHC on additional tax.

The counsel sought time from the court for getting fresh instructions from the FBR in the case.
The court adjourned further hearing of the case indefinitely at the request of the lawyer.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC to hear review petition seeking Murad’s disqualification*

The Frontier Post
January 24, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) has fixed a review petition, seeking disqualification of Sindh Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah over allegedly possessing dual nationality, for hearing.

A three-member SC bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial would hear the case filed by Roshan Ali. The petitioner in his plea said that the Sindh chief minister, while concealing his UAE work permit and his dual nationality and lying in front of the electoral body during the 2013 general elections, is no more truthful and honest, thus he should be declared disqualified.

The plea would be taken up by the SC bench on January 28. Notice has been served to Syed Murad Ali Shah for the hearing. A bench of the apex court had earlier dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against a verdict of Sindh High Court seeking disqualification of the chief minister.

It is to be noted that a Sindh High Court bench had rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Sindh CM for failing to disclose his Canadian nationality and the United Arab Emirates Iqama to the Election Commission of Pakistan.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC seeks schedule of local body polls from ECP*

Top court adjourns hearing till February 4

January 28, 2021


*ISLAMABAD:*The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the schedule of local body elections to be held in the provinces from the Election Commission of Pakistan and expressed displeasure over the delay. 

During a hearing of the local bodies elections case in Islamabad, the court also sought the presence of the attorney general, chief election commissioner, and other officials of ECP, who appeared in the court.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa, during the hearing, said that it seems that the Election Commission is not taking directions from the Constitution, but from 'somewhere else'.

Referring to the Article 6 of the Constitution, the senior judge said, "those creating hurdles in the Constitution's implementation are committing high treason. He advised the CEC to "step down from your post if you cannot organise the elections."

He further commented that it seems that democracy is no longer a priority of the election authority. "Why are the local bodies polls not being organised," he asked and added, "why are the masses being deprived of democracy."

Reminding the ECP officials of their constitutional oath, Justice Isa said, "not organising by-elections means [the authority is] not following the directions of the top court." He went on to add that the attorney general should tell the prime minister that "Constitution is more important."

Responding, the CEC pledged to organise local bodies elections in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on April 8. 

Adjourning the hearing till February 4, the SCP told the CEC to discuss elections in the provinces with the officials and submit the minutes of the meeting on the said date.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC adjourns review petition seeking CM Sindh Murad Ali Shah’s disqualification*

The Frontier Post
January 28, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday adjourned a review petition, seeking disqualification of Chief Minister (CM) of Sindh Syed Murad Ali Shah over allegedly possessing dual nationality till date in office. A three-member SC bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the case filed by Roshan Ali. 

The petitioner in his plea said that the Sindh chief minister, while concealing his UAE work permit and his dual nationality and lying in front of the electoral body during the 2013 general elections, is no more truthful and honest, thus he should be declared disqualified.

During the course of proceedings, Advocate Hamid Khan counsel for the petitioner said that he client had filed a petition to form a larger bench in the case. The verdict in the case of Justice Faez Isa on the same issue was also reserved, he added.


Justice Bandial said that the point regarding sitting of the judges in a review case was very important.

He said it would be better to wait until the other case was decided.


----------



## ghazi52

*No anticipatory bail in criminal cases: Supreme Court*

Says only exception to the rule are cases in which mala fide is ‘manifestly intriguing’


Hasnaat Malik
January 30, 2021


*ISLAMABAD: *The apex courthas declared that the accused in a criminal case cannot be granted anticipatory bail unless mala fide is “manifestly intriguing upon the intended arrest”.

“It is by now well-settled that the accused in a criminal case cannot be granted anticipatory bail to subvert or undermine investigative procedure/process.

“[This process] essentially includes arrest in order to bring the statutory exercise to its logical end for effective and meaningful prosecution of the offence through collection of information/evidence consequent upon arrest,” said a written order penned by Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed.

Justice Ahmed was part of a three-judge bench – presided over by Justice Mushir Alam – that heard the bail applications of two Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) officers, arrested in a case registered with the FIA Anti-Corruption Circle (ACC) in Karachi.

The officers were accused to have received bribe of Rs24million from Sheikh Muhammad Munawar, arrayed as accused in a financial scam. Munawar had allegedly defrauded the Utility Stores Corporation to effect a massive sale transaction through a fake ISO certification.

During the inquiry, incriminatory statements of various witnesses were forensically confirmed from the computer CDR and ledgers secured from the custody of co-accused Abdul Qadir Memon, a front man. It was on the basis of this comprehensive probe that the petitioners braced for an impending prosecution.

The written order said: “A detailed parallel story narrated by the petitioners notwithstanding, they were admittedly at the helm of affairs to call the shot and thus in a position to rescue the complainant from the troubled situation he was trapped”.

It said various pieces of evidence including forensic data, beyond susceptibility of human interference unmistakably suggest a conduct perfidious to the call of their duty hence, prima facie, cognizable. The court, therefore, dismissed the bail applications.

The order said that mala fide – manifestly intriguing upon the intended arrest – is the only justification to suspend or divert the usual course of law in the case of anticipatory bails. However, this step is “most extraordinary by all means”












No anticipatory bail in criminal cases: Supreme Court | The Express Tribune


Supreme Court declared that accused in a criminal case cannot be granted anticipatory bail unless mala fide is ‘manifestly intriguing upon the intended arrest’




tribune.com.pk


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs authorities to move Omar Sheikh from death cell to rest house*

Dawn.com
February 2, 2021


 






In this March 29, 2002 file photo, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the alleged mastermind behind Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl's kidnap-slaying, appears at the court in Karachi. — AP


The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed authorities to move Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the prime accused in the 2002 killing of American journalist Daniel Pearl, from a death cell in the Karachi Central Prison to a government rest house within the next two to three days.

The apex court also directed authorities to ensure complete security of the rest house, and allowed Sheikh's family access to him from 8am to 5pm, while hearing a petition filed by the accused against his detention despite high court orders in this regard.

The accused, however, will not be given access to mobile and internet services while his family will be given accommodation and transport on the government's expense, according to the court's directives.

On Jan 28, by a majority of two to one, the apex court had upheld the high court's acquittal of Sheikh for Pearl's murder and ordered his release if he was not wanted in any other case.
A day earlier, Attorney General (AG) Khalid Jawed Khan Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan appeared before a three-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, to highlight that the high court had barred the federal government from issuing any preventive detention order when there was a mandatory requirement to issue a notice and hear the AG before issuing such orders.

The Supreme Court, however, preferred to maintain the status quo for a day instead of granting any stay against the SHC order in which the federal and provincial governments were directed not to issue any preventive detention order without prior permission of the high court.
The high court had also directed that all the accused — Sheikh, Fahad Nasim Ahmed, Syed Salman Saqib and Sheikh Muhammad Adil — be released from jail forthwith on the receipt of the order unless they were wanted in any other custody case.

During today's hearing, the attorney general told the court that the country had been affected by terrorism during the past 20 years. "Tragedies such as those at the Army Public School and in Mach have not occurred anywhere else in the world. Omer Sheikh is not an accused but a terrorist mastermind."

Justice Umar Ata Bandial responded by asking the attorney general to prove Sheikh's terrorist links. "How does he relate to the incidents you have mentioned?" the judge asked.
The attorney general responded by saying that the state was of the opinion that the case against Sheikh was strong.

At this, Justice Muneeb Akhtar replied that until yesterday the attorney general's stance was that the SHC did not hear the federal government. "From your arguments it seems that you no longer have these objections," the judge remarked.

However, the Sindh advocate general replied that the federal government was not a party in the case heard by the high court.
"Did the Sindh government raise any objection in the high court regarding this?" asked Justice Akhtar. The Sindh advocate general replied that no objection was raised.
"The detention of the accused seems to be a provincial matter. The federal government has delegated its authority to the provinces. Therefore, it seems that only the Sindh advocate general needs to be given notice," Justice Akhtar said.
"The petitioner did not challenge a law which would warrant sending a notice to the attorney general," the judge remarked, adding that there were no grounds for a notice to be sent to the attorney general.
The attorney general replied that the court could not deprive the federal government of its powers. "There should also be proof before exercising powers," said Justice Shah, adding that the provincial government did not have proof to keep the accused detained.
When the attorney general replied that it was possible the state was in possession of such proof, the judge questioned why the material was not handed over to the provincial government.
"It seems that the attorney general has not read the reasons for the decision of the high court," said Justice Shah.
Justice Bandial also asked the federal government to present the evidence against the accused.
The attorney general informed the court that Sheikh held both Pakistani and British citizenship and had studied at the London Schools of Economics.
Justice Bandial remarked that Sheikh had been incarcerated for 18 years while the charges proven against him were for kidnapping. "Keeping one detained means 'no trial'," he said, adding that it would be wrong to accuse someone of being a terrorist without proof.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC asks govt to submit reply in FATA merger case*

The Frontier Post
February 3, 2021

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Federal Government to submit its response in a case challenging 25th Constitutional Amendment.

A three-member SC bench comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the case. The 25th Constitutional Amendment was passed by the Parliament in May 2018 under which the erstwhile Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) were merged in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. The constitutional petition was filed by elders and Maliks of the former tribal areas through Barrister Wasim Sajjad.

During the course of proceedings, the bench asked how the amendment regarding the merger of FATA, which was administered by the Federation, with a province was approved.

Waseem Sajjad said the wording was changed in the 25th Amendment.

Justice Munib Akhtar said the merger of Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) into the provinces was possible because they were already their part.

He asked what was the procedure for the merger of FATA with the province.

Waseem Sajjad said the constitutional status of the tribal areas was abolished, which was against the basic structure of the Constitution. No constitutional amendment could go against the basic structure of the Constitution, he added.

He said that the provincial assembly passed the bill without seeking the governor’s approval while the president approved the bill directly.


The Additional Attorney General said the amendment did not affect any fundamental rights of the tribal areas.


He said the petition was not maintainable under Article 184/3, and the government wanted to submit written objections in that regard, which the court allowed.

Later, the case was adjourned for a month.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs Federal Govt to hand over Katas Raj Temple to ETPB*

The Frontier Post /
February 15, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Federal Government to take over the control of Katas Raj Temple from Punjab government and hand it over to the Evacuee Trust Properties Board (ETPB) within two weeks.

A three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed heard the suo moto notice case regarding the rights of minorities.

During the course of proceedings, the court expressed annoyance over non-appearance of the Chief Secretary Punjab, observing that its order had also not been implemented.

The Secretary Implementation Punjab replied that the chief secretary was busy due to the cabinet meeting.
The CJP observed that the duty of the chief secretary was to ensure implementation of the court orders.
The court sought the report regarding restoration of Parlab Temple Multan within two weeks.

Minorities leader Ramesh Kumar informed the court that an amount of Rs 38 million had been spent on the Samadhi before the Karak incident and the ETPB had not paid the expenditures.
The court asked Ramesh Kumar to submit details of the expenditure incurred on Samadhi.


Advocate Kamran Murtaza, counsel for the accused, said the proceedings of criminal cases were not continuing due to the suo moto notice and the trial courts were not granting bails to more than 100 people arrested in the case.

The CJP observed that the SC had directed the trial court to proceed under the law and asked whether any recovery had been made from the accused of the Karak incident.

Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan directed to make recoveries from the attackers, who were shown in the videos of attack.

The Advocate General KP said the amount of damages was being calculated and notices would also be issued to the accused. Faisal Chaudhry, Additional Advocate General Punjab, said the walls of Parlab Temple were weak and there was danger of its collapse.



The chief justice remarked that the court had already issued order to provide security to the temple and asked whether the Punjab government was providing security for the Holi festival.

The Additional Advocate General Punjab requested the court to allow the reconstruction of the walls of historic temple. The Parlab Temple and the shrine of Bahauddin Zakariya was adjacent, he added. He said it was directed to celebrate the festival on March 26 whereas the opposition had announced a long march on March 26 and due to political environment, the provision of security would be difficult as the Punjab government had to look all the aspects of security.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC delists Khursheed bail plea*

The Frontier Post /
February 17, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday delisted PPP leader and former Leader of Opposition in National Assembly Syed Khursheed Ahmed Shah’s bail matter due to unavailability of the bench.

A three-member SC bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, was to hear bail pleas filed by Syed Khursheed Shah and his family.

The case was delisted due to unavailability of Justice Sardar Tariq.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC orders re-election in NA-75 Daska*



*Web Desk*
April 02, 2021


The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday upheld the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision to hold re-polling in the entire National Assembly constituency NA-75 in Daska.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Umer Ata Bandial, heard the petition of PTI candidate Ali Asjad Malhi, challenging the ECP order of February 25, 2021, declaring the by-election at NA-75 Daska void and ordering re-polling in the whole constituency.

The decision was reserved by the bench after the arguments were concluded by all the parties. The Supreme Court in its verdict ordered the ECP to hold re-polling in NA-75 Daska on April 10.
On Feb 25, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had ordered re-election in the NA-75 Sialkot-Daska constituency over alleged rigging and irregularities.

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had challenged the Election Commission of Pakistan’s decision to order re-polling at all polling stations in NA-75. The petition was moved by PTI candidate from Daska Ali Asjad Malhi.
Moreover, the ECP had also ordered the suspension of the relevant deputy commissioner, the district police officer (DPO), assistant commissioner and SPDO Daska over “rigging” during the by-poll in the NA-75 constituency.


----------



## ghazi52

*Apex Court accepts CAA petition against SHC order*


The Frontier Post

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday suspended the Sindh High Court’s (SHC) order and accepted the Civil Aviation Authority’a (CAA) petition for hearing in a service matter.

A two-member SC bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel heard the case filed by the CAA against SHC order regarding disbursement of retired benefits to Nadeem Zubari. The Sindh High Court had ordered to issue pension to the General Manager Security who completed his job on a fake degree.

At the outset of hearing, the court was informed that CAA General Manager Security had a fake degree.
The CJP observed that the situation in the Civil Aviation Authority was not good as pilots had been flying aeroplanes with fake degrees.

He said the people with fake degrees had completed their jobs on the most important posts of a sensitive department like security.

That was the reason smuggling at airports was so easy, he added.

He observed that even CCTV cameras installed at the airports did not work.

Advocate Khalid Siddiqui, counsel for the CAA said GM Nadeem Zubairi not only submitted a fake degree but also forged the confirmation letter of Karachi University.

He pleaded the court to quash the SHC order as it contracted facts.

The court after hearing arguments suspended the order of the high court and admitted the CAA’s appeal for hearing.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC directs govt to fix price of oxygen cylinders in two days*


KP's Advocate General says suppliers are charging excessively for oxygen cylinders in absence of official rates
DRAP's lawyer says the Ministry of Industries and Production deals with the supply of medical oxygen and that the drug regulator has nothing to do with it


Fahad Zulfikar 
05 May 2021









*(Karachi) The Supreme Court has issued instructions to the Ministry of Industries and Production to fix the price of oxygen cylinders within two days, local media reported on Wednesday.*

As per details, the top court issued the directives on a plea filed by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government. The court also sought an explanation from the ministry about the price-setting mechanism.

During arguments, the KP's Advocate General said suppliers are charging excessively for oxygen cylinders in absence of official rates.

Similarly, Additional Attorney General informed the bench that the Pakistan Steel Mills oxygen plant is nearly 40 years old. He added that it will cost Rs1 billion to make the plant functional. He told the court that a detailed report on the oxygen situation will be submitted.

Meanwhile, a Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP) lawyer said the Ministry of Industries and Production deals with the supply of medical oxygen and that the drug regulator has nothing to do with it. He said that they can’t issue instructions as it does not fall under its jurisdiction.
Earlier, Sindh Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah said that the oxygen plant at Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM) could be made operational in three months with an amount of Rs1 billion.

Murad said that the Sindh government is ready to spend Rs1 billion for making the Steel Mill oxygen plant operational as the country, especially the province would need oxygen supplies in case of a surge in coronavirus cases.

The CM stated that improving oxygen supplies would enable the provincial government in ensuring the proper treatment of critical patients.

Special Assistant to Prime Minister on Health Dr. Faisal Sultan said that the country's oxygen production capacity is being increased to support the health system and counter an increasing number of Covid-19 infections.

He said that Pakistan Steel Mills' (PSM) oxygen plant would be re-activated to meet the country's oxygen demand.


----------



## ghazi52

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday will take up the petition of sacked judge of Islamabad High Court Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui challenging the notification of the President terminating his service.

A five-member larger bench headed by Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising of Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will hear the petition on May 31.

Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui had filed an application in the Supreme Court on April 28, requesting for fixing his case at the earliest, as he was going to retire on June 30.

Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui had challenged before the apex court the decision of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), recommending his removal from his post for misconduct as well as a notification of the government issued on Oct 11, 2018, terminating his service.

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) had recommended the removal of Islamabad High Court judge, Justice Shaukat Siddiqui from his office for leveling serious allegations against state institutions, including the judiciary and the premier state intelligence agency, during a speech at the District Bar Association, Rawalpindi.

Meanwhile President Arif Alvi on Oct 11, 2018, had terminated Justice Shaukat Siddiqui after the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) found him guilty of misconduct.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court to hear Shaukat’s appeal today*


by The Frontier Post










ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday will take up the petition of sacked judge of Islamabad High Court Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui challenging the notification of the President terminating his service.

A five-member larger bench headed by Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising of Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will hear the petition on Monday.

Shaukat had filed an application in the Supreme Court on April 28, requesting for fixing his case at the earliest, as he was going to retire on June 30.

Shoukat Aziz Siddiqui had challenged before the apex court the decision of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), recommending his removal from his post for misconduct as well as a notification of the government issued on Oct 11, 2018, terminating his service.

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) had recommended the removal of Islamabad High Court judge, Justice Shaukat Siddiqui from his office for leveling serious allegations against state institutions, including the judiciary and the premier state intelligence agency, during a speech at the District Bar Association, Rawalpindi.

SC to take up govt petition against SHC decision: Supreme Court on Monday will take up federal government’s petition against the judgment of Sindh High Court (SHC) deeming the sugar commission and its report unlawful.

A three-judge special bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan will hear the federal government pension tomorrow (Monday).

Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Khan, on behalf of the federal government, filed a petition against the ruling on August 17.The Supreme Court on September 2, 2020 had allowed the federal government appeal and suspended the SHC judgment against the inquiry commission report on sugar mills. The court had also issued notices to the sugar mills owners.

The SHC on August 17, 2020 had quashed the fact-finding report and the iss-ued notifications constituting the commission of inquiry.


----------



## ghazi52

ISLAMABAD (APP): Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected the National Highway Authority (NHA) report on dilapidated condition of N-25 highway and sought report on repairing of highways and accidents.

A three-member Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi heard the case and expressed annoyance over the performance of NHA.

During the course of proceedings, the Chief Justice questioned the Member Admin NHA as to where the funds received by the National Highway Authority were utilized. NHA roads damaged by rainwater, he added.

He said that NHA was responsible for killing of people in traffic accidents.

Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed said that NHA had become a corrupt institution as petrol pumps, hotels, shops had been leased on highway lands.

According to the 2018 report, 5,932 people were killed in 12,894 accidents while today’s news was that 36,000 people lost their lives in road accidents this year, he added.

The National Highway Authority Member Planning Shahid Ahsan said that the condition of the roads would be improved by the end of this year.

Chief Justice said that the NHA was not doing standard work on any road as people were dying on the roads due to NHA’s negligence. Not even trees were planted on the sides of the highways, he added.

He said that the contractors in the NHA were engaged in minting money. The NHA got so much money but it was not known where these funds were utilized, he added.

Later, hearing of the case was adjourned till date in office.


----------



## ghazi52

*Over 51,000 cases pending before Supreme Court*

The Newspaper's Staff
June 28, 2021 


Over 51,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it emerged on Sunday. — AFP/File
KARACHI: Over 51,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it emerged on Sunday.

According to the latest fortnightly report of the apex court, 423 cases were decided from June 1 to June 15 whereas 628 new cases were filed during the same period and the total pending cases stood at 51,387.

On June 1, the pendency was at 51,182 and the principal seat of the apex court in Islamabad had decided 398 cases in two weeks; the Karachi registry disposed of 25 cases and no case was decided in three other registries at Lahore, Peshawar and Quetta during this period, the report said.

Similarly, the principal seat of the apex court had received the highest numbers of cases, i.e. 281, followed by 191 at Lahore registry, 106 cases at Karachi registry, 35 cases at Peshawar registry and 15 cases were filed at the apex court’s Quetta registry during June 1 to 15, it concluded.

‘Missing’ person case

The Supreme Court has directed the police to submit a progress report within three weeks regarding the whereabouts of a man reportedly went missing in 2016.

A three-judge SC bench headed by Justice Maqbool Baqar expressed resentment over SSP-Malir and other police officials for not fulfilling their responsibilities to provide protection to citizens.

The police and a provincial law officer argued that a joint investigation team had investigated the case and the alleged missing person had himself gone away after contracting another marriage. However, the bench observed that it was the responsibility of police to trace the current location of the man in question and directed them to come up with a progress report within three weeks.

Relatives of Niaz Ajan submitted that he went missing from Cattle Colony within the remit of the Sukhan police station and his whereabouts still remained unknown while the high court had disposed of their petition on the basis of a police report.

Published in Dawn, June 28th, 2021


----------



## ghazi52

*SC seeks report on 2019 Sahiwal tragedy*


Notes that no one is going to hold killers of innocent civilians accountable


Aqeel Afzal
June 30, 2021





Supreme Court. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE


*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court has sought a report from the Punjab government on January 2019 Sahiwal tragedy – an alleged encounter in which Punjab Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) killed four people including three members of a family on a highway near Sahiwal city.

A division bench, comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Yahya Afridi, issued this order on Wednesday while hearing the bail plea of Hafiz Mohammad Usman, a police officer accused of shooting a civilian in a separate incident that took place in Lahore on March 13, 2020.

During the hearing, the counsel for Hafiz Mohammad Usman told the court that the Dolphin Police Force in Lahore had received a phone call with regard to alleged illegal activities committed by a Muhammad Hasan Bhatti.

“When the police carried out a raid, Bhatti tried to flee in his car. The police opened fire on him, injuring him fatally. Later, Bhatti died during treatment at a hospital,” he said, adding that Bhatti had a criminal record.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa lamented that police took the life of a person just on the basis of a phone call. He then recalled the Sahiwal tragedy and asked Punjab Additional Prosecutor General Abid Majeed Mirza, who was present in the courtroom, as to what happened in the case.

Mirza told the court that the case is probably pending before the Lahore High Court (LHC).

“I don't understand what the Punjab government and police are doing,” Justice Isa said.

“No one is going to ask the killers of innocent civilians. Tell me what the Punjab government did in the Sahiwal tragedy and what action it took against the culprits,” he said, directing the additional prosecutor general to submit a report on the incident.

In October 2019, a special bench of an anti-terrorism court (ATC) acquitted all the six officials of the Punjab CTD who were accused of the brutal murder of four people near Sahiwal.

Judge Arshad Hussain Bhutta had given the police officials the benefit of doubt. He had announced the verdict after hearing testimonies of 49 witnesses, including the brother of one of the victims.

The accused - Safdar Hussain, Ahsan Khan, Ramzan, Saifullah, Hasnain and Nasir Nawaz - had shot dead a couple, Khalil and Nabeela, their daughter Areeba, and another man Zeeshan on January 19, 2019.

*Bhatti’s case*

The counsel for Bhatti’s family contended that the policeman who opened fire on Bhatti, Abdul Razzaq, had a monetary dispute with the victim.

The bench, however, granted bail to the policeman, Hafiz Mohammad Usman, as all the other policemen accused in the case including Abdul Razzaq have already been granted bail.


----------



## ghazi52

*Justice Mandokhail takes oath as SC judge*

Justice Afghan sworn in as BHC chief justice


 Our Correspondents
August 09, 2021






*ISLAMABAD: *Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, previously serving as the chief justice of the Balochistan High Court, was administered the oath on Monday as a judge of the Supreme Court.

The oath was administered by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed at a “simple and dignified ceremony” held at the SC in Islamabad. The SC registrar conducted the proceedings of the oath-taking ceremony.

On the occasion, the apex court judges, attorney general of Pakistan, senior lawyers, law officers and officers of the Law and Justice Commission were present. The staff and officers of the SC were also present at the ceremony.

The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) in July approved the name of the Balochistan High Court CJ for elevation to the Supreme Court. After a passage of seven years, a BHC judge is being elevated to the apex court. Earlier, Justice Qazi Faez Isa was elevated to the SC in September 2014.

The commission had also approved senior puisne judge Naeem Afghan as the new BHC chief justice.







_A copy of the SC notification issued following Justice Mandokhail's oath-taking as the apex court judge. PHOTO: EXPRESS_


*BHC chief justice*

In a separate ceremony held at the Governor House in Quetta, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan was sworn in as the new chief justice of the BHC. Justice Afghan was administered the oath by Balochistan Governor Syed Zahoor Ahmad Agha.

The oath-taking ceremony was attended by Balochistan Chief Minister Jam Kamal, judges of the high court, provincial ministers, members of the Balochistan Assembly and military officials.


----------



## ghazi52

*Justice Ayesha Malik to be appointed as first SC woman judge in 74-year history*







https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/web-desk
*Web Desk*
1:02 AM | August 13, 2021


The Chief Justice of Pakistan has convened a meeting of the Judicial Commission to appoint Lahore High Court Justice Ayesha Malik as the first woman Judge of the Supreme Court in 74 years.

It has been decided to make Justice Ayesha A. Malik a judge of the Supreme Court.

According to sources, Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed has convened a meeting of the Judicial Commission on September 9 in this regard.

Sources revealed that SC's Justice Mushir Alam is about to retire on August 17.

Justice Malik ranks number four on the seniority list of the LHC.

She was born in 1966, completed her basic education from schools in Paris, New York, and Karachi.


----------



## ghazi52

*No room for second review in Constitution, says SC*
*Top Story*

Our Correspondent 
September 22, 2021


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday said there is no concept of second review under the Constitution and dismissed a review petition in a case related to allotment of a plot.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, dismissed the plea seeking a second review in the matter. During the proceedings, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah observed that there was no place for a curative petition under the law of the land.

"One will have to go to India for seeking relief in second review as there is no place here under the law of Pakistan,” Justice Mansoor Ali Shah observed, adding that the concept of second review is only available in India but not here in Pakistan. The judge observed that even in death sentence cases, the second review petitions are not entertained, then how this matter could be entertained. “Your Cantonment plot is not more important than anyone’s life,” Justice Mansoor Ali Shah told the petitioner’s counsel.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the past, the apex court had declared many second review petitions as maintainable. At this, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar asked the counsel to go through the judgment he is referring to, which had clearly stated that there is no space for the second review.

Justice Umer Ata Bandial observed that the apex court can set aside its own judgment if there is any issue of public interest and is related to fundamental rights. However, there is no room available for a second review under the Constitution of Pakistan.

Meanwhile, the court dismissed the second review petition sought by the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention here that in May, the government had filed a curative review petition against the order of the majority in the review petitions of Justice Qazi Faez Isa passed on April 26, 2021. The registrar of the Supreme Court had returned the instant petition after raising objections to it, saying that once the review petition is decided, it cannot be reviewed.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC rejects bail plea of B4U CEO Saif*

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed the interim bail plea of B4U Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Saif Ur Rehman, an accused of cheating public at large in a multi-billion rupee scam.

The Police arrested him as soon as he stepped out of the court premises following dismissal of his bail.

A three-member bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the case and announced a short order after hearing arguments from the accused’s lawyer Barrister Latif Khosa and the NAB prosecutor.

Latif Khosa counsel for the accused said that NAB did not have jurisdiction to probe this matter as the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) regulates investment firms. He said that his client was cooperating in investigation against him.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah noted that the SECP forwarded a reference to the corruption watchdog for investigation.

Justice Bandial observed that the bureau wanted to investigate the alleged scam involving billions of rupees.


----------



## ghazi52

*Supreme Court seeks details of welfare plots in Karachi*







Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday has heard a case pertaining to the construction of two private hospitals on welfare plots in Karachi’s Clifton.

During the proceedings at Karachi registry, the apex court sought details of all the welfare plots in Karachi and issued notices to director general of Karachi Development Authority (KDA), commissioner and administrator.

Earlier in the day, the SC turned down review petitions filed by owners and allottees in Nasla Tower case.

While hearing the matter, the court directed the commissioner to act on the June 16 order and told that written decision in this regard will soon be issued.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC dismisses petitions seeking presidential form of govt*


Top court states the Constitution does not provide any guidance for the presidential form of government, as it supports the democratic system

BR Web Desk 
27 Sep 2021









*The Supreme Court of Pakistan has declared all the petitions seeking implementation of the presidential system in the country as non-maintainable, it was reported on Monday.*

The apex court said the point raised in the petitions was political. It said the Constitution of Pakistan does not provide any guidance for the presidential form of government, as it supports the democratic system.

“There is no clause in the constitution, which mandates the Supreme Court to issue instructions to the prime minister for a referendum for the presidential form of government,” the top court said.

The ruling comes on petitions submitted by four petitioners identified as Sahibzada Ahmed Raza Khan Kasuri, Dr Sadiq Ali, Tahir Aziz Khan and Hafeez-ur-Rehman Chaudhry. They had filed identical constitutional petitions under Article 184(3) of the Constitution in the Supreme Court for a presidential form of government in the country.

They prayed the court, being the custodian of the rights of people and the Constitution, may direct the prime minister of Pakistan to hold a referendum under Article 48(6) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in order to ascertain and determine the will of the people of Pakistan.

Earlier, President Dr Arif Alvi also ruled out enforcement of the presidential system in Pakistan. He said the parliamentary system is very strong in Pakistan and there is no debate on the presidential system in the country.

He said enforcement of the presidential system can create problems in the country. He said powers devolved to provinces under the 18th Amendment cannot be taken back.


----------



## ghazi52

*The Supreme Court was informed that Rs1,173 million has been provided by the Punjab government for acquisition of additional land for Dadhocha Dam.*

A two-judge bench, headed by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, on Friday, heard the contempt of court petition against buying and selling of plots of Dadhocha Dam land.

The Court, in the last hearing, had directed the Punjab advocate general to file a comprehensive report about the construction of the dam and about its land.

Additional Advocate General (AAG) Punjab filed the report regarding acquiring additional land.

According to the report, due to various factors, including buying and selling of dam land and the litigation, the dam construction could not be started.

The report said any sort of construction at the site of the dam has been banned and the owners of the lands around the dam site were issued notices.

Petitioner Col (retired) Muhammad Tariq Kamal had informed the bench that though the construction of the dam is going, the Bahria Town and the DHA authorities are selling the dam's land.

Justice Sajjad directed the AAG to supply a copy of the report to the petitioner, adjourned the hearing for two weeks.

In 2019, the Punjab government had told the Supreme Court that it will complete the construction of the dam in 2021.

The government has allocated Rs2.8 billion to purchase the land for the dam.

The dam was proposed in 2001.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC grills Secretary LG Punjab over failure to restore local bodies*

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Friday grilled the Secretary Local Government (LG) Punjab over non-restoration of local bodies in the province and sought a report over the matter.

A two-member SC bench comprising Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel heard the contempt of court case against the Punjab government over local government bodies’ failure to resume functions despite a SC judgement.

During the course of proceedings, the counsel for the petitioner said that the provisional government of Punjab did not restore the local bodies despite the court order issued on March 25.

Upon this, the Chief Justice asked the Secretary Local Government Punjab what measures were taken by the government to restore the local bodies.

Secretary Local Government Noor-Ul-Amin respondent that he needed time to hire a counsel.

Expressing displeasure over the Secretary’s reply, the chief justice said that despite being a local government secretary, the official did not know about the local bodies.

He observed that the Secretary did not know his responsibilities. He asked when did the court order the restoration of local bodies?

The petitioner responded that the Supreme Court ordered the restoration of local bodies on March 25, 2021.

The chief justice noted that the tenure of local bodies’ would expire in December this year.

He called Mayor Lahore Mubashar Javed to the rostrum and asked what had the local representatives done so far?

The Mayor Lahore replied that they called their meetings on the street as per order of the court. He alleged that the Punjab government did not facilitate the workings of local bodies.

He said that the meetings and work of local body representatives had also been covered in the media.

Addressing the Mayor, the chief justice said that the representative of the local bodies were not interested in working on their own.

Go around the world and see how local bodies work, he asked the Mayor and said that if they wanted to work, they would have done it while sitting on the streets.

He said that the local bodies across the country were restored by order of the Supreme Court. Local government representatives were waiting for Manna, he added.

The Mayor said that they did not even have a cleaner then how they could work. The Chief Justice said that if they did not know the job description, they all should sit at homes. He said that the local government officials did not have passion to work.

The Mayor said that the local body representatives were locked out of their offices by the Punjab government officials.

Upon this, the chief justice asked name the people who locked the offices. The local bodies wanted money and staffers to resume work, he added.

Later, hearing of the case was adjourned till Wednesday.


----------



## ghazi52

*Minorities rights and Constitution of Pakistan*

The Frontier Post

A two-member Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel heard the suo moto notice case regarding demolition of a Hindu Temple in Karak by a violent mob a few months ago. During the hearing of the case on Wednesday, the apex Court ordered to recover Rs 33 million from the accused involved in burning/demolition of the temple. The Advocate General of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had informed the court that more than Rs 33 million was spent on the restoration of the temple, whereas the Chief Justice was of the view that the accused would learn a lesson when Rs 33 million were recovered from them.

In fact, the weak implementation of law and corruption in the Police Department has completely abolished the fear of punishment and rule of law among the public. The shroud individuals tactfully use the mob violence for their vested interest and try to escape the law while taking shelter of the crowd. Apparently, Police do not fix the responsibility or degree of involvement of the accused in criminal cases in a bid to provide relief to the blue eyed.

Our religion and constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan has conferred equal rights to the minorities of the country. The basic religious rights, protection of minorities, warship places, lives and properties have been guaranteed under the constitution. Therefore, it is the duty of the state machinery to take suitable measures in this regard. Unfortunately, few acts of violence against minorities have happened in various parts of the country which badly tarnished the image of the country. Attacking non-Muslims or their worship places in any garb is not a service to the religion, in fact, such incidents reflect ill mentality. 

The Supreme Court of Pakistan is highly admirable for taking suo Moto action the cases and rightly decided to recover the reconstruction expenses from the culprits involved in the heinous crime. It is suggestible that such criminals must be declared ineligible for any government service or public office including contest of local bodies and general election for the whole life, so this regrettable trend can be curbed permanently.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC orders demolition of Karachi's Nasla Tower within a week*

Shafi Baloch
October 25, 2021








A view of the Nasla Tower in Karachi. 


The Supreme Court (SC) directed the Karachi commissioner on Monday to demolish Nasla Tower, a 15-storey residential building located at the intersection of Sharae Faisal and Shahrah-i-Quaideen, through "controlled blasting" within a week and submit a report.

The matter was taken up by a three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, at the SC's Karachi registry, where the city commissioner appeared before the court.

The court further instructed the commissioner to ensure that no harm was caused to other buildings and persons in Nasla Tower's vicinity because of the blast.

It also directed the builder of Nasla Tower to refund money to registered buyers of the residential and commercial units, adding that the city commissioner should ensure that the refunds were made.

The court adjourned the hearing of the case until Tuesday (tomorrow).

A three-judge SC bench, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, had initially ordered the demolition of the 15-storey building for encroaching on the land meant for a service road on June 16.

Issuing a detailed order for the same on June 19, the court had also directed the builders of Nasla Tower to refund the amount to the registered buyers of residential and commercial units within three months.

The court had said in its judgement that “After examining the entire record and scrutinizing the reports submitted by all concerned agencies and departments, we are in no manner of doubt that the tower in question (Nasla Tower) has indeed been constructed on encroached land which amongst other things has also blocked a service road.”

“Being illegal construction and there being no provision for compounding such illegality specially where a service road has been blocked, the same is liable to be demolished,” it had added.

The apex court had also directed the Karachi commissioner to remove all persons from the building and take its possession immediately and initiate and complete the demolition process as expeditiously as possible and submit a report in court.

Later, the builder of Nasla Tower had filed a review petition against the June 16 order, which was dismissed by the apex court last month.

Subsequently, the district administration served notices to the residents of Nasla Tower earlier this month, directing them to vacate the 15-storey building by October 27 or face coercive action by relevant authorities.


*Other cases*

On Monday, the SC bench headed by the CJP also heard the case pertaining to the construction of Tejori Heights, which is being contested on the grounds that the land for the building belongs to the Pakistan Railways (PR).

The lawyer representing Tejori Heights said at the hearing that the court had issued directives for sealing the project in November 2020 and a review petition had been filed against the order.

He added that the PR had also filed a civil suit pertaining to the matter in the Sindh High Court.
At his request, the court adjourned the hearing until tomorrow.

The bench also heard a plea challenging the construction of a multi-storey building in Bahadur Yar Jang Cooperative Housing Society.

The plea stated that the land for the building was illegally occupied.

"The building has been constructed on an amenity plot," the petitioner's lawyer told the court, adding that the land had been allocated for a park.

The court issued notices to the Karachi Cooperative Housing Society, the builder, Karachi Development Authority (KDA) and Sindh Building Control Authority and adjourned the hearing.

In another case, the court directed the KDA director general to rehabilitate a playground, which was inundated by sewerage water and filled with garbage, in New Karachi's sector 5-D.

"Plant trees and install new furniture [there]," the court ordered, while directing the Karachi commissioner and KDA DG to take the said measures at the earliest and submit a report along with pictures within a month.


----------



## ghazi52

*Remove marriage halls from CAA land: SC*

By Jamal Khurshid
October 27, 2021








KARACHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Board of Revenue to submit a complete report on the illegal occupation and encroachments on the state land in Sindh.


Hearing a petition on encroachments of the government land, the Supreme Court's three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, asked the revenue official as to what steps were taken to protect the revenue record from being tampered. The senior member of the Board of Revenue submitted that 95 percent of the land record had been computerised and uploaded on website. He submitted that about 400 suspected revenue record entries have been blocked.

To a court's query about the removal of encroachments on the state land, the revenue officer submitted that the encroached land was retrieved with the assistance of the Irrigation and Forest departments. The court directed the Revenue Department to submit a report to that effect. The court observed that encroachments on the state land is a serious problem and state functionaries should ensure the removal of encroachments.

Regarding the allotment of land to the Civil Aviation Authority, the chief justice inquired from the CAA director general about the purpose of additional land and the utilisation of previously-allotted land. The court inquired from the CAA officer as to why the CAA land was being used for running marriage halls. The court ordered the removal of marriage halls from the CAA land and directed that the airport land shall be used only for the purpose of airport. The court expressed dissatifaction over the performance of CAA and observed that the Karachi airport was in a dilapidated condition and all the international traffic was diverted from Karachi.

The CAA counsel submitted that 209 acres of the CAA land were being illegally allotted. The senior member Board of Revenue submitted that NA-class land has been surveyed and demarcated. He said that previously the land was not allotted on market price.

The court also issued notices to KMC and others on an application against the commercial use of the Askari Park at old Sabzi Mandi. The applicant submitted that the park administration was using the park on commercial basis and shops were allotted to private persons.


----------



## ghazi52

*Illegal structure: SC orders demolition of Tejori Heights in one month*


The apex court grants three-month time to the builder to compensate the affectees

BR Web Desk 
29 Oct 2021







*The Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the demolition of Tejori Heights within a month which has been built illegally on railways land in Karachi's Gulshan-e-Iqbal area, Aaj News reported on Friday.*


While announcing the verdict, the apex court bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Gulzar Ahmed, ordered the city commissioner to raze the structure in one month. The court also directed the Tejori Heights owner to pay compensation to the affectees.

The legal counsel representing Tejori Heights owner, Raza Rabbani, requested the court to grant some time before the reimbursement to the allottees can be done.

The SC granted at least three-month time to the builders of Tejori Heights for complete reimbursement of the affectees. The top court also directed both the civic authority and the builders to submit a report on the demolition of the building.

Earlier, the SC issued a detailed judgment on the demolition of Nasla Tower in Karachi.


In its detailed verdict, the apex court directed the authorities to use the latest technology to demolish the high-rise building situated on Shahrae Faisal through a controlled blast.

It stated that a modern detonation procedure, being used in other countries, should be adopted to raze the building. The top court ordered to take all precautionary measures to ensure that no damage occurs while demolishing the building. The court directed to complete the process by November 3.

The SC also ordered that the owner of Nasla Tower will pay the cost of the demolition and directed the Karachi commissioner to sell the plot to recover the amount if he refuses to pay.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC to take up plea on allotment of plots to bureaucrats, judges*

Justice Bandial-led bench will hear petitions against IHC orders tomorrow


Hasnaat Malik
October 30, 2021






*ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court will take up the petitions against the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) restraining orders regarding allotment of plots to judges, bureaucrats and government employees in the capital’s F-14 and 15 sectors, for hearing on Monday (tomorrow).

Through their counsel, Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, several serving and retired federal government servants have filed two petitions against the IHC’s August 20 and September 13 orders, requesting the apex court to restrain the IHC from passing orders of similar nature against the petitioners.
Earlier, the Federal Government Employees Housing Authority (FGEHA) had also filed petitions through Akram Sheikh advocate against these IHC orders. On Monday, a three-judge apex court bench, led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will hear all these petitions.

It is learnt that several SC judges are beneficiary of recent balloting regarding the allotment of plots in F-14 and F-15 sectors. Earlier, in similar nature of matter, six judges had recused themselves from hearing the case related to scrapping a federal government housing scheme in F-14 and F-15 sectors of the federal capital.

The petitions contended that the petitioners, being serving and retired government servants, were the allottees of plots/land in sectors F-14-F-15, Islamabad, and had deposited the required amount for long with the FGEHA in lieu of their allotted plots.

They also submitted that the question as to whether the land could have been acquired for the FGEHA was not the subject matter of the writ petition, whereas the IHC’s order on Sept 13, 2021 observed otherwise and travelled beyond their prayers even which was not the issue raised before the court.

“The petitioners are seriously prejudiced by the impugned order dated Sept 13 passed by the learned division bench of the IHC being violative in law,” said a petition.

The petition further stated that prior to 2009, the FGEHA offered housing to employees for specified scheme on the basis of their age and seniority in government service in its scheme-specific drives.

The FGEHA, it added, at the time of launching a new scheme, would advertise a membership drive for the particular scheme, and employees were allotted housing within that scheme and seniority of members subscribing to the scheme specific drives was determined on the basis of date of birth or the seniority within the relevant government cadre.

The petition further stated that while exercising the jurisdiction in the instant matter, “the high court, with due respect, has passed the order which amounts to judicial overreach, thus requires intervention” by the apex court.

“Constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution cannot be exercised in vacuum when particularly all contentious issues regarding acquisition and public interest/public purpose adequately resolved earlier with admirable clarity by the larger bench of this court reported judgment 2021,” it said.

“The high court failed to comprehend while exercising the jurisdiction that there must exist a dispute before exercising judicial power by an aggrieved person within the meaning of Article 199 of the Constitution and further this is an essential pre requisite to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, thus impugned order is not sustainable.”

The petition stated that the IHC could not reassert or reassess the proceedings on such point which already decided by this court and those principles had further been elaborated through various judgments of the apex court.

“The high court failed to understand and comprehend the concept and application of aggrieved or aggrieved person given under Article 199 of the Constitution,” the petition contended.

The petition said that the high court went beyond the jurisdiction given under the Constitution and acted against the principles of oversight jurisdiction enshrined under Article 199 of the Constitution and pronounced by this court.


----------



## ghazi52

*CAA stops wedding events on its lands*

Aviation regulator moves to abide by apex court order


DNA
October 31, 2021





A file photo of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) office. PHOTO: CAA

*KARACHI: *The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on Sunday notified all its offices to stop the aviation regulatory authority lands from being used for commercial purposes, including wedding ceremonies.

The notification was issued in line with the order of the apex court prohibiting the authority to allow its lands to be used for commercial activities, stressing that they could only be used for aviation regulatory purposes alone.

According to the CAA spokesperson, the directive came into effect at the time of its issuance. The notification states that no weddings in the halls and marquees built on the lands will be held from now onwards.

The bookings for wedding ceremonies made in the past will be considered cancelled henceforth and marquee owners shall be given back their security deposits, the spokesperson confirmed.
Similarly, those who booked the place will be recompensed within 10 days.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down hard on the Civil Aviation Authority for running wedding halls on its land.

Hearing a case about CAA lands at the apex court’s Karachi registry, a bench headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed directed the country’s aviation regulator to end all the commercial activities other than airport-related services on its premises.

“It is not CAA’s job to run wedding halls,” the court remarked, instructing it to utilise the land for the purposes it was obtained for.

Justice Qazi Amin Ahmed, a member of the bench, questioned whether aviation regulators around the globe run marriage lawns.

“If that is the case, then open night clubs and casinos as well,” he berated the CAA.


----------



## ghazi52

*Tree Tsunami and Barren Hills*

The Frontier Post







A two-member Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Ijaz-Ul-Ahsan summoned the forest secretaries of all four provinces while hearing a suo motu case about fast depletion of forest in the country. 

The Supreme Court directed the provinces to submit reports on tree plantation projects within a month. The adjudicators took serious note of the reports of diminishing of forests by the timber mafia in Kumrat, Swat, Nathia Gali and other areas while raising concern about massive construction of hotels and plazas on green hills in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

During the hearing, KP forest department officials claimed that the department had planted 190 million trees across the province. Upon this Justice Ijaz remarked that if so many trees were planted, the entire province would be filled with greenery. All the work had been handed over to Allah Almighty by throwing seeds in the province. 

He asked where they get the plants for 190 million trees? The chief justice asked the officials not to try to impress the court by showing foreign media reports. He said that the whole city of Peshawar was deserted. Justice Ijaz asked if the court had sought a comprehensive report on the federal government’s ‘10 billion tree tsunami’ initiative highlighting the exact number of trees as well as the areas where they had been planted. The reason for asking for the record was that the trees did not appear in the papers only, he added.

Forests are an important factor in the survivability of mankind and other living organisms on the earth and also play an important role in the national economy. According to international estimates, a country must have forest on 25 to 30% of its territory, whereas Pakistan is barely having 4 percent of its land under forests.

The incumbent government has put special efforts for plantation of trees in the country under its tree Tsunami and billion Tree Tsunami campaigns on papers and social media only. The public and judiciary of the country have no trust in the Foresters of the country, who have more expertise in making money instead of protection of forestry and environmental development. Therefore, the nation must not wonder if the ten billion trees will be eaten up by the goats or the seeds will flood away through heavy rain in future. We appeal to the Supreme Court bench, to hear the case on a day to day basis.


----------



## ghazi52

The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday ordered the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority (ERRA) to complete all under-construction school projects in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) by June 22.

A three-member apex bench presided by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed conducted the hearing of a suo-moto case regarding the plight of government schools in the province.

The top court expressed its annoyance to chairman ERRA over the non-completion of the projects which were under the authority’s purview.

“ERRA officials are just taking salaries and benefits,” the CJP told the ERRA chairman. “If it had been your own children who were out of school then you would have worked,”

The authority’s head prayed that about 14,000 projects were to be completed, and that only 3,000 were left. “Education and health are our top priority,” he claimed.

To this, the CJP responded that had education and health been the authority's priority then the projects would have been completed by now.

“The earthquake hit areas and schools should have been built within a year,” CJP Ahmed said, adding that the schools, of which photographs were presented before the court, seem inactive.

Bench member Justice Qazi Amin said that the K-P government’s negligence had turned education into an industry.

“The college fee used to be Rs8, now it is Rs30,000 for school going children,” Justice Amin said. “It is the responsibility of the state to provide free education. The K-P government should not try to hide behind the ERRA,” he further stated.

The provincial advocate general prayed that so far 238 out of 540 schools had been completed.

The SC sought a progress report from the K-P government on the said projects and adjourned the hearing for a month.


----------



## ghazi52

*SC grills PM Imran on talks with the TTP, questions govt's inaction against perpetrators*

Haseeb Bhatti
November 10, 2021








Policemen stand at the Supreme Court premises in this file photo. — DawnNewsTV







Prime Minister Imran Khan arrives at the Supreme Court after being summoned. — DawnNewsTV

The Supreme Court on Wednesday grilled Prime Minister Imran Khan over the government's inaction against those responsible for the Army Public School (APS) attack in 2014 and the ongoing talks with the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

A three-judge bench — headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed, and comprising Justice Qazi Mohammad Amin Ahmed and Justice Ijazul Ahsan — summoned the prime minister in connection with the case around 10am. He arrived at the court roughly two hours later, just before noon.

A total of 147 people, 132 of them children, were martyred when TTP militants stormed the APS-Warsak School, in Peshawar, in 2014. The government is in talks with the TTP over a "reconciliation process", with Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry having announced on Monday that a "complete ceasefire" had been reached with the banned outfit.







Prime Minister Imran Khan's convoy arrives at the Supreme Court. — DawnNewsTV

During the hearing, Justice Amin reminded the premier that Pakistan is not a small country. "We have the sixth largest army in the world," he said.

With regards to media reports regarding negotiations with the TTP, Justice Amin questioned whether "we are bringing them [TTP] back to the negotiating table instead of taking action against them?"

"Are we going to surrender once again?" Justice Amin asked the premier.

As the three-member bench continued to grill the premier, at one point the latter asked for a chance to speak, given that he had been summoned for the hearing.

But the judges continued to fire questions at him.

CJP Gulzar said, "You are in power. The government is also yours. What did you do? You brought those guilty to the negotiating table."

"The satisfaction of the parents [who lost their children in the APS attack] is necessary," said Justice Ahsan addressing the premier.

A day earlier, the information minister said that the government will give a chance to those factions of the TTP that are not directly involved in terrorism and are ready to honour Pakistan's Constitution and law, whereas the hardcore TTP terrorists involved in the killing of innocent people and still wanting to continue their nefarious activities will be dealt with an iron hand.

The decision was taken at a meeting of the federal cabinet presided over by Prime Minister Imran on Tuesday.

Speaking at a post-cabinet meeting press conference, Chaudhry said: "If all of them or some of them or part of them want to come back and express their allegiance to the Constitution of Pakistan and undertake to respect the law of the country, obviously, we will give them a chance."

*Court directs govt to submit report*

During the hearing today, the bench asked the federal government to listen to the stance of the victims' parents, saying action should be taken against anyone whose negligence was proven.

Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan said it would have been "very easy" to register a case against then-prime minister Nawaz Sharif and then-interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan.

The apex court directed the government to submit its report within two weeks, but AG Khan requested the court to grant additional time. Accepting the plea, the court granted four weeks to the government.

The court inquired from Prime Minister Imran what action had been taken in the case.

Chief Justice Gulzar then picked up the Constitution book and said it guaranteed security to every citizen.

Prime Minister Imran said he had opposed Pakistan's involvement in the US war on terror during former military ruler retired Gen Pervez Musharraf's rule.

He noted that Pakistan had lost 80,000 lives to terrorism, while the National Action Plan was drafted after the APS attack. "The people were in deep trauma, they were standing behind the army in the war against terrorism."

Imran said Pakistan would have to contend with security issues until the Afghanistan situation settled down.

He said since the Taliban took over power in Afghanistan in August, elements from the militant Islamic State group, TTP and Baloch separatists had arrived in Pakistan. Such elements had also gone underground during the Afghanistan evacuation via Pakistan, he added.

"All of our security agencies are taking steps to deal with the possible threats," the premier told the court.

Prime Minister Imran said the APS attack had been "very painful". "Our party was in power in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa when the attack took place in 2014. On the night of the tragedy, we called a meeting of our party," he added.

He further said there were no "holy cows" among the names provided by the parents of the APS attack victims, seeking action against them. "You issue orders and we will take action," he told the bench.

"I want to make it clear that we have done whatever compensation we could have."

At this, the chief justice remarked that the parents wanted their children, not compensation.

Justice Ahsan then informed the prime minister that the victims' parents desired that action be taken against the officials in high-level positions at the time of the attack.

*'PM respected supremacy of law'*

Talking to media later, Interior Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said the Supreme Court had given four weeks' time to the government to finalise its report about the case. He said the premier had assured the top court of exposing everyone — "whether it is the interior minister or people of higher agencies" — found responsible for the APS attack.

He further said if the apex court sought the appearance of then-prime minister Nawaz Sharif, "the interior ministry will issue a permit and passport in 24 hours for the ex-premier to return to the country."

Meanwhile, Information Minister Chaudhry said Prime Minister Imran had once again respected the supremacy of the law by appearing before the court. He said the government would finalise its report in four weeks and submit it to the Supreme Court.

"We could have simply said the PML-N was in power at that time and accused then-PM Nawaz Sharif and the former interior minister of failure. But we realise this war is beyond individuals," he emphasised.

Crediting the National Action Plan for peace in the country, the minister said the Pakistan Army and security agencies also deserved appreciation for rendering sacrifices to protect the country.

Chaudhry said the last three years of the PTI were the "most peaceful years of Pakistan's history".

"Civil agencies, army, ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) must be given plaudits for implementing far-sighted decisions of the country's political leadership."

He said "intelligence failures do occur" around the world, saying in one such example, five bombers living in front of the White House in the US had gone unnoticed.

*Court summons PM*

During the last hearing, the Supreme Court bench had directed the attorney general to inform the court about the steps taken by the government to redress the grievances of the parents of children martyred in the attack on APS on Dec 16, 2014.

He had assured the parents of the victims of the court's assistance in their efforts for acceptance of their demands.
"The AG has been put on notice on the complaints and asked to take action, as required by the law, and if those who have been named are found guilty of negligence in the performance of their duties, necessary measures should be taken," an order dictated by the chief justice said.

The court emphasised that unless some drastic efforts were made, the petitioners would not be satisfied.
In its Oct 20 order, the court had noted that the mothers of the victims had complained that then-army chief General Raheel Sharif, then-interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, then-chief minister Pervez Khattak, then-corps commander Peshawar Hidayatur Rehman, then-DG ISI Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam, then-secretary interior Islamabad Akhtar Ali Shah were the people "who were at the helm of affairs [and] ought to have known about the happening of the incident but they neglected in performance of their duty to the extent that schoolchildren has happened".

In today's hearing, the chief justice asked AG Khan whether the prime minister had read the court's order in which he had directed the AG to take action on the complaints of the victims' parents.

The AG informed the court that the order had not been sent to the premier, adding that he would inform PM Imran about it.

"Is this the level of seriousness?" CJP Ahmed asked. "Call the prime minister, we will talk to him ourselves. This cannot go on."

The AG, on behalf of the government, said that "we accept all our mistakes".

The parents had demanded the registration of a first information report (FIR) against those civilian and military officials who, they believe, were responsible for security measures at the school, at the last hearing.

During the proceedings today, the AG said, "FIR could not be registered against higher-ups."


*'Where does the intelligence go?'*

"Where do the intelligence [agencies] disappear when it comes to the protection of their own citizens?" the chief justice asked. "Was a case registered against the former army chief and others responsible?"

The attorney general replied that the inquiry report did not find anything related to the former army chief and former director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

At this, CJP Gulzar remarked, "There is such a huge intelligence system in the country. Billions of rupees are spent on it. There is also a claim that we are the best intelligence agency in the world. So much is being spent on intelligence but the results are zero."

Justice Ahsan said the institutions "should have known there would be a reaction to the operation in tribal areas".
"The easiest and most sensitive target were children," he added.

*Talks with TTP*


Justice Amin observed that there were reports the government is negotiating with some group — an apparent reference to the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

"Is it not the state's job to go after and catch the true culprits?" he questioned.

Chief Justice Ahmed remarked that the court "could not leave children to die in schools".

Action had been taken against the school's guards and soldiers, however, the accountability process should have started from the top, he added.

"The higher-ups took salaries and benefits and left."

Justice Ahsan said it was "not possible that the terrorists did not have inside support" and termed the attack a "failure of security".


*Judicial commission report*

On Oct 5, 2018, former chief justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar had appointed a judicial commission to probe the massacre, asking the late Peshawar High Court chief justice Waqar Ahmed Seth to nominate a PHC judge for the task.

Justice Mohammad Ibrahim Khan of the Peshawar High Court conducted the proceedings and presented the commission's report, which the Supreme Court ordered to be made public.

The commission observed in its 525-page report it was regrettable that the APS episode had tarnished the image of the armed forces. It took to task the Askari Guards, as well as the other guards on duty, for "inertia in the face of initial heavy firing by the terrorists".

The commission's report consisted of statements by the bereaved families, evidence given by the bureaucracy, the police and the military. It made a special mention of “the belated response” to the assault by the security detail and highlighted the grievances shared by parents of the Shuhada (martyred students).

"Had the force shown a little more response and could engage the militants in the very beginning of the attack, the impact of the incident might have been lesser," the report observed.

It praised the MVT-2 and the Quick Response Force for blunting the terrorists' advance towards a student block through their prompt action.

"Our country was at war with an enemy which carried out occult activities and let loose terrorism which hit the highest point in 2013-14," the report recalled. But it does not mean that our "sensitive installations and soft targets could be forsaken as a prey to terrorist attack", the commission stressed.

The report was submitted to the SC on July 9, 2020, and in August 2020, the apex court had ordered the AG to get instructions from the federal government on the report.

In September 2020, the SC had ordered the government to make the report public.

_Additional reporting by Nadir Guramani._


----------



## ghazi52

*Are wedding halls and cinemas for defence?' CJP grills govt official over military land's commerical use*

Shafi Baloch
November 26, 2021






A photo of Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed. — APP/File

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Gulzar Ahmed on Friday grilled the defence secretary over commercial use of military land, asking whether structures like cinemas and wedding halls were built for defence purposes.


A three-judge bench headed by the chief justice and comprising Justice Qazi Mohammad Amin Ahmed and Justice Ijazul Ahsan was hearing the issue of military lands being used for commercial purposes at the Supreme Court's Karachi registry.

The CJP questioned Defence Secretary retired Lt Gen Mian Mohammad Hilal Hussain about the activities being conducted on military lands. "This land was given to you for strategic and defence [purposes and yet] you have started commercial activities on it," he said.

"Were wedding halls, cinemas and housing societies built for defence purposes?" CJP Ahmed asked.
He remarked that all Askari housing projects had been built on cantonment lands.

"We have decided that this will not happen again," the defence secretary said, adding that the construction of housing societies and commercial use of military land would be checked and stopped.

At this, Justice Amin asked Hussain how that would be made possible and where the process would start. The judge asked him to provide a written explanation.

The chief justice commented that colonels and majors were acting like kings. "What the colonels and majors desire, happens," he said.
"Go and tell all the chiefs [of the armed forces] that the land meant for defence purposes will not be used for commercial objectives. Go to all the military cantonments and tell them the land will be used only for strategic purposes," CJP Ahmed ordered the defence secretary.


He also said that commercial activities were underway at Masroor Base and Faisal Base and tall buildings had been erected when orders were given to remove signboards.

The bench asked Hussain whether he had a written report regarding the matter, at which the secretary requested more time to submit the same.

The court adjourned the hearing until November 30, saying it would take place in Islamabad and also ordered that a written report be submitted.

While hearing the case on Wednesday, the chief justice had stated that the conversion of cantonment land into private land seemed to be in direct contravention of the Cantonment Act, 1924, Cantonment Land Rules, 1937, and various constitutional provisions and the issue needed to be heard and decided by the court.

The bench had expressed resentment over director cantonment and military land, Karachi region, Adil Rafi Siddiqui, over such activities within the jurisdiction of cantonment boards and also sought a report from him about a wall being built on the premises of a park in Defence Housing Authority Phase-I.


*Hearing on Nasla Tower, Tejori Heights*

While conducting hearings on other cases, the chief justice asked Karachi Commissioner Muhammad Iqbal Memon till when the demolition of Karachi's Nasla Tower would be completed. Memon replied that no timeframe could be provided and that 200 labourers were working on the project.

The CJP told him to double the labour force and ordered the tower to be demolished within a week and a report to be submitted.

Updates were also provided to the bench about progress in the demolition of the Tejori Heights tower, with a legal representative saying that 60 to 65 per cent of the building had been demolished.

He also told the court that files had been recovered from the building's offices and work was underway on providing compensation to the affectees.


----------



## ghazi52

...........
*Setting aside a Lahore High Court judgment, the top court has ruled that double taxation was not beyond the scope of the relevant legislature if in substance the levy in question was otherwise properly within its domain.*

"The correct rule is that there is a very strong presumption against double taxation and a heavy burden is cast on the State to show that it has been resorted to,” read a six-page verdict authored by Justice Munib Akhtar while setting aside an LHC order, which had declared that Section 7 of the Punjab Finance Act, 2011 that remained in the field till 2015 as ultra vires the Constitution.

“However, if the language of the statute is otherwise clear then the levy cannot be declared unconstitutional on such basis,” it added.

Section 7 of the Act had imposed education cases on clubs.

A three-judge bench of the apex court led by Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan has directed all elite clubs that any amount that remained recoverable from them shall be paid in four equal quarterly installments, the first one being due and payable on June 30, 2022.

However, the SC judges were unable to agree with the LHC that double taxation was impermissible under the Constitution.

“The question of double taxation invariably arises (although this does not necessarily always need to be so) within the four corners of the same statute,” the order read.

"The case usually presented before the Court is that in addition to the charging section of a fiscal statute the State claims that pursuant to some other section(s) therein, the same subject matter is being taxed again. The objection taken by the taxpayer is that this is double taxation, i.e. the subject matter of the charging section is being taxed all over again. It is essentially in this context that the rule has been laid down and applied.”

However, even in this context if the court came to the conclusion that the levy imposed must be enforced regardless of whether it amounted to double taxation if the language of the other section was clear and unambiguously imposed the tax, the order added.

"This, of course, is not the case at hand. Here we have two different statutes, one being the 2000 Ordinance/2012 Act and the other the aforementioned Section 7 of the 2011 Act. The question of double taxation does not therefore arise. The only possible question could be whether the levy imposed by Section 7 was within the legislative competence of the province.”

The order also read that it was well settled that in determining the constitutionality of a levy, it was its substance that would be considered, regardless of the name or label attached to it.

"We are, with respect, unable to see how that entry has any relevance for present purposes. Clearly, and this was quite correctly accepted by learned counsel, the levy imposed by Section 7 was not on the sale of goods. When learned counsel were queried as to what, in substance, was the levy imposed by the section if not a sales tax on services, they were, with respect, unable to come up with a satisfactory answer."

The bench noted that in its view, the substantive nature of the levy was clearly a sales tax on services. “It could well be the case that this levy imposed a double financial or commercial burden on the respondents, and for the same transactions they were liable to pay sales tax both under the 2012 Act as well as Section 7.”
.......


----------



## ghazi52

Today's proceeding regarding Sindh house in Islamabad attack, filed by Bar Association.....






.


----------



## ghazi52

.,.,.
CJP asks why SC should deal with political matters when its decisions are criticised at rallies​Haseeb Bhatti
April 18, 2022






Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial. – Photo courtesy Supreme Court/File

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, while hearing a presidential reference seeking its interpretation of Article 63-A on Monday, questioned why the Supreme Court should deal with political matters when its decisions are criticised at gatherings of "10 to 15,000 people".

The chief justice's comments come days after recently ousted prime minister Imran Khan publicly asked the judiciary to explain why it felt the need to open its doors at midnight on April 9, hours before he was ousted from the Prime Minister's Office via a successful no-confidence motion against him in the National Assembly.

With the deadline set by the Supreme Court to hold voting on the no-trust move fast approaching after a marathon NA session, the apex court and the Islamabad High Court (IHC) had opened their doors beyond their notified timings. The vote was eventually held and saw Khan voted out from the top office.

In what was his first public address since losing his government, Khan directly addressed the judiciary, and asked: "My dear judges, my judiciary, I have spent time in jail because of your freedom because I dream that one day the judiciary would stand with the weak people of the society, and not the powerful.

"I ask you, what crime had I exactly committed that you opened up the courts at midnight?"

The PTI chairman repeated the question at his Karachi rally as well on Saturday.

The chief justice, without naming anyone in particular, said today that the apex court should be respected. "The court fulfills its constitutional responsibilities. National leaders should defend court decisions.

"We are cursed for doing our jobs and protecting the Constitution. Why should the court get involved in your political matters?" he said while addressing Islamabad Advocate General Niazullah Khan Niazi.

"Protecting the Constitution is our responsibility. We will fulfill our responsibilities," Justice Bandial added.
"The court works 24 hours. No one has the need to raise a finger on the court proceedings," he remarked.

He made the remarks during the hearing of the reference filed by the PTI government before its ouster. Headed by CJP Bandial, a five-member bench including Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail is hearing the reference.
Request to adjourn hearing dismissed​At the outset of the hearing today, Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Amir Khan requested the apex court to adjourn the hearing in the wake of former attorney general Khalid Jawed Khan's resignation.

However, Justice Bandial dismissed his request and said that the attorney general's arguments had been completed. "In my opinion, we should keep hearing the presidential reference," he said.

PTI counsel Babar Awan urged the court to issue notices on party chairman Imran Khan's petition, which was moved in SC earlier seeking a lifetime ban on defecting lawmakers.

Justice Bandial replied that the court was already hearing a case related to the matter highlighted in Khan's petition.

"All the respondents are here too. This is a case of constitutional debate," the CJP said, reiterating that the court would continue hearing the presidential reference.

Separately, Islamabad Advocate General Niazullah Khan Niazi told the court that he endorsed the former attorney general's arguments.

"The Supreme Court has given its ruling in the Panama verdict," he recalled. "The decision of the court is important [for] lifetime disqualification."

Niazi argued that a vote is a trust that a political party gives to an MNA. "Conscience can't be sold for money," he said, adding that lawmakers could be forced to pass anti-national legislation in return for money.

He said that the situation in Punjab was in front of everyone and "all the stakeholders are looking at the court."

The advocate general pointed out that dissident lawmakers could not even go out in public today.
'Matter should be discussed in parliament'​Meanwhile, Justice Mandokhail observed that some people were in favour of lawmakers being allowed to dissent while others were against it.
"The parliament has not clarified about lifetime disqualification," the judge stated and then wondered if the parliament had deliberately not mentioned it or if it was an oversight.

Justice Mandokhail pointed out that the parliament was still in existence, adding that the Article should perhaps be discussed in the house. "Why are you bringing this matter to the court?"

At this, Niazi said that the court was responsible for interpreting the Constitution. "Votes are being sold even after Senate elections," he added.
Justice Mandokhail, however, interjected that the parliament should be allowed to make amendments itself.
Violation of 63-A not 'treason'​Justice Bandial observed that political parties were one of the founding blocks of parliamentary democracy and they have been given protection in four circumstances under Article 63-A.
The CJP recalled that General Ziaul Haq had removed the clause of restriction on dissenting from party lines from the Constitution.
"Amendments to the Constitution were made in 1998 when decisions on horse-trading were taken," he said. "In 2010, under the 18th Amendment, Article 63-A was included."
Justice Bandial pointed out that violating the Constitution was not a small matter.

"Many people violate the Constitution and then have Article 6, which is related to treason, [applied to them]," he said, adding that violating Article 63 cannot be turned into a case of treason.

According to the presidential reference, Justice Bandial continued, Article 62(1) — which sets the precondition for a member of parliament to be "sadiq and ameen" (honest and righteous) — should be applicable to dissident lawmakers.

The court would decide the consequences of violating the Constitution, whether the MNA concerned leaves [the party] or pays a price, the CJP said.
However, the Islamabad AG said that dissenting from party policies meant deviating from the oath of the parliament.
But Justice Mandokhail asked that if lifetime disqualification came under Article 63-A, what would be the significance of Article 95 then.
"The matter of Article 95 is not in front of the court right now," Niazi replied.

Justice Mandokhail then asked if the court could include the clause of lifetime disqualification itself.
"The court has already decided on lifetime disqualification while interpreting Article 62(1)(f)," Islamabad AG Niazi said as he completed his arguments.
PTI counsel requests time​Meanwhile, PTI counsel Babar Awan requested the court to review the party's separate petition related to dissident lawmakers. "The petition has nothing to do with memogate," he said, referring to the "threat letter" allegedly containing details of a foreign conspiracy to oust former premier Khan.

"The gate will have to be closed now," Justice Mandokhail remarked.

Awan replied that the court previously had a chance to do that but it was wasted.

Justice Bandial rejected the PTI counsel's request.

Continuing his arguments, Awan said that it had been a week that the country was functioning without a federal cabinet. "For the past eight days, we have not had a government.

"There's no attorney general or law minister," Awan said. "Who will argue on behalf of the government?"

CJP Bandial asked Awan if he would endorse the attorney general's arguments to which Awan replied that he would not support them "at any cost".

"Khalid Javed Khan had played tricks during his arguments," he said, requesting the court to grant him time till tomorrow to present his arguments.

'More honourable to resign if voting for opp party'​Justice Bandial observed that the reference was submitted by the president, not the PTI government and the court would hear it at any cost. "The court will also give its opinion on Article 63-A."

Subsequently, Balochistan National Party (Mengal) lawyer Mustafa Ahad began his arguments.
He argued that the president had asked the court to rewrite the Constitution in the reference. "But Article 63-A is completely clear."
"Would it be a crime to disagree with the party's policy on a constitutional amendment that would reduce judicial powers?" Ahad asked.

Here, Justice Akhtar clarified that voting on constitutional amendments and for an opposition party were two separate things.
"It is more honourable to resign if you (lawmakers) want to vote for the opposition party," he observed.

Ahad contended that a resignation could not be the only solution, adding that confining a lawmaker to follow the party leadership was equivalent to slavery.

"By saying so, you are denying parliamentary democracy," Justice Akhtar said. "If you disagree with the party policy, leave [the party]. You can come back by independently contesting the by-election."

Justice Ahsan also observed that those declared dissidents by the Constitution cannot be deemed credible.
Justice Mandokhail observed that not voting against the party policy would make Article 95 ineffective.
However, Justice Akhtar asked how Articles 63-A and 95 could make each other ineffective. "There is a need to strike a balance between Article 95 and Article 63-A," he observed.

"Do you want the court to declare that every member has the right to vote independently on the no-confidence motion?" Justice Akhtar asked and then said that Articles 62 and 63 could only be read together.
The BNP lawyer also criticised what happened during the Punjab Assembly session on Saturday when members of the treasury benches attacked Deputy Speaker Sardar Dost Muhammad Mazari. During a face-off between PTI and PML-N MPAs, PML-Q leader Chaudhry Parvez Elahi was injured as well.
PTI not serious: CJP​Meanwhile, Awan, while referring to the Senate elections last year, said that two party members had approached the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) with videos. He did not give further details.
Awan said that former finance minister Hafeez Shaikh lost the Senate election because of horse-trading and the sale of votes. "Fair and transparent elections are the responsibility of ECP," he argued, adding that even during the elections for the Senate chairman, PTI had submitted a request to the ECP.
The CJP, however, said that Awan's comments showed that his party was not serious.
"The SC has decided its parameters regarding suo motu cases," Justice Bandial said, adding that the court was disappointed PTI did not follow the apex court's rules in its request to the ECP.
Meanwhile, Justice Mandokhail said that the reference showed that there was a flaw not in the Constitution but in "ourselves".
During the hearing, the BNP lawyer argued that the court was being told to interfere in political matters. He also claimed that a "campaign" was being run against the courts.
Chief Justice Bandial observed that the head of the political party had the power to take action against dissident lawmakers.
"It is possible that the party chief will not do anything," he observed. "It is also possible that the defectors justify their deed."
Subsequently, the CJP adjourned the hearing till 1pm tomorrow.
'Courts must learn to stay away from politics'​Commenting on the chief justice's remarks, former information minister Fawad Chaudhry said the court needed to "rethink" its stance.
"No where in the world courts decide political questions and policy, courts in Pak must learn to stay away from politics, midnight courts will not get respect anyways," he tweeted.


Presidential reference on Article 63-A​Before its ouster, the PTI government had filed a presidential reference for the interpretation of Article 63-A, asking the top court about the "legal status of the vote of party members when they are clearly involved in horse-trading and change their loyalties in exchange for money".
The presidential reference was filed under Article 186 which is related to the advisory jurisdiction of the SC.
In the reference, President Dr Arif Alvi also asked the apex court whether a member who "engages in constitutionally prohibited and morally reprehensible act of defection" could claim the right to have his vote counted and given equal weightage or if there was a constitutional restriction to exclude such "tainted" votes.
He also asked the court to elaborate whether a parliamentarian, who had been declared to have committed defection, would be disqualified for life. It cautioned that unless horse-trading is eliminated, "a truly democratic polity shall forever remain an unfilled distant dream and ambition".
"Owing to the weak interpretation of Article 63-A entailing no prolonged disqualification, such members first enrich themselves and then come back to remain available to the highest bidder in the next round perpetuating this cancer."
The reference had been filed at a time when the then-opposition claimed the support of several dissident PTI lawmakers ahead of voting on the no-confidence resolution against then-prime minister Khan.
Article 63-A​According to Article 63-A of the Constitution, a parliamentarian can be disqualified on grounds of defection if he "votes or abstains from voting in the House contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party to which he belongs, in relation to election of the prime minister or chief minister; or a vote of confidence or a vote of no-confidence; or a money bill or a Constitution (amendment) bill".
The article says that the party head has to declare in writing that the MNA concerned has defected but before making the declaration, the party head will "provide such member with an opportunity to show cause as to why such declaration may not be made against him".
After giving the member a chance to explain their reasons, the party head will forward the declaration to the speaker, who will forward it to the chief election commissioner (CEC). The CEC will then have 30 days to confirm the declaration. If confirmed by the CEC, the member "shall cease to be a member of the House and his seat shall become vacant".
,.,.,


----------



## ghazi52

.,.,
Backlog of cases in SC reduces to 52,796​Recorder Report
04 Jun, 2022








*ISLAMABAD: The pendency/ backlog of cases in the Supreme Court has reduced by 1,182 cases during the last four months.*

According to the press release of the PRO SC, issued on Friday, the backlog of cases stood at 53,964 on 31st January 2022 which has been reduced to 52,796 during the last four months. As per statistics, a total of 6,509 cases were instituted, in this Court, during the period from 1st February 2022 to 31st May 2022 while 7,691 cases were disposed of during the same period.

It said that the corresponding numbers for the same period for the year 2021 stood at 7,603 and 3,730 respectively showing an increase of 3,873 cases in pendency. The current strength of judges, in Supreme Court, is 14, against sanctioned strength of 17, compared to 16 during the same period last year.

The Average disposal of cases per day was 96 against an Average Institution of 67 cases per day while the corresponding numbers for the previous year, during the same period, were 54 and 81 respectively. Despite working at a strength of 14, the Average disposal per Judge, during the said period of four months, was 549 compared to 233 for the same period in the previous year.

The statement said from 31st December 2013 onwards, the backlog/pending cases in this Court have increased from 20,517 to 53,560 on 31st December 2021.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022


----------



## ghazi52

.,,.,.,


----------



## ghazi52

,.,.
SC backs 'concept of deterrent punishment’​Top court sets aside FSC decision on reinstatement of head postmaster after his acquittal from NAB proceedings

Hasnaat Maik
August 14, 2022

The Supreme Court has advocated the 'concept of deterrent punishment' in service matters.

It noted that sometimes a little negligence or inefficiency might cause a serious disaster and stern end results. “Therefore, at the time of appraising any act of misconduct contrasted with the penalty imposed by the management, the Service Tribunal is obligated to reevaluate the evidence all inclusive and then inquiry findings with recommendations,” read a nine-page judgment authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar while setting aside the Federal Service Tribunal’s (FSC) decision on the reinstatement of the head postmaster after his acquittal from National Accountabilty Bureau (NAB) proceedings.

“[The] foresight of deterrent punishment is not only to maintain balance with the seriousness of wrong done by a person but also to make an example for others as a preventive measure for reformation of the society,” the verdict added.

The SC observed that the respondent was found guilty in discharge of his duties, hence he could not be let free or exonerated.

A division bench of the apex court led by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the matter.
The judgment stated: “According to clause (b) of Section 2 of the RSO 2000, the definition of 'misconduct’ included conduct prejudicial to good order or service discipline or conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman or involvement or participation for gain either directly or indirectly in industry, trade or speculative transactions or abuse or misuse of the official position to gain undue advantage or assumption of financial or other obligations to private institutions or persons such that might cause embarrassment in the performance of official duties or functions.”

It added that Section 3 of the same ordinance was “germane” to the dismissal, removal and compulsory retirement of certain persons in government or corporation service whose powers could be exercised by the competent authority in the circumstances and state of affairs if the employee was found to be inefficient, guilty of being habitually absent from duty without prior approval of leave, or guilty of misconduct or corruption.

However, the court noted that before taking any drastic action, it was incumbent upon the competent authority to inform the accused in writing the grounds of the action and give them a reasonable opportunity of showing cause.
The court also noted that the articulation that misappropriation of huge amount of public money from saving accounts being not in the knowledge of the respondent was nothing but a “figment of imagination and also beyond reasonable comprehension”.

"In contrast, it is a deceptive and dishonest plea in our sagacity, which in fact aggravates the degree of negligence, inefficiency and incompetence and proves that the respondent was not capable or qualified to hold any responsible post as he failed to sense any act of embezzlement and misappropriation of public money in the post office under his command … [this] could not have happened had the respondent performed his duties diligently and kept a vigilant eye on the books of account with periodic exercise of reconciliation for prompt checking and reporting in case any mishap or misappropriation of public funds is detected in the accounts, the judgment read.

“Being the postmaster, he was responsible for overseeing all aspects of the post office including the management of staff and the services or products offered by the post office. The corruption of substantial sums of public money could not be taken so lightly and that is why the respondent was dismissed by the management, but the Service Tribunal without any just cause took the lenient view whereas the respondent did not deserve any compassion or sympathy,” it added.

The order stated that common sense or realism of criminal trial was to mete out punishment of the offences committed by the accused while departmental inquiry was started off for a probe into the allegations of misconduct in order to maintain and uphold discipline and decorum in the institution and efficiency of the department to strengthen and preserve public confidence.

The judgment also noted that a civil servant could not escape departmental proceedings or consequences thereof on account of his acquittal on a criminal charge.

"While facing expulsive proceedings on departmental side on account of his indictment on criminal charge, he may not save his job in the event of acquittal as the department may still have reasons to conscionably consider his stay in the service as inexpedient. The department can assess the suitability of a civil servant, confronted with a charge through a fact-finding method, which somewhat inquisitorial in nature, but without the heavier procedural riders otherwise required in criminal jurisdiction to eliminate any potential risk of error,” the verdict read.


----------



## ghazi52

,..,
SC ‘astonished’ at NAO amendment​Asks how money deposited with NAB under plea bargain would be reimbursed to the accused

Hasnaat Malik
October 06, 2022






Supreme Court of Pakistan. 
*
ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court has expressed wonder over the amendment in National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 which aims at undoing all plea bargains earlier entered into between the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the accused.


A three-judge special bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial expressed astonishment during the hearing of PTI Chairman and former premier Imran Khan’s petition on Wednesday against recent amendments in NAO.

This was the seventh hearing of the case wherein Imran’s counsel Khawaja Haris continued to advance his arguments in the case.

The PTI chief in his petition had claimed that the amendments to the NAB law were made to benefit the influential accused persons and legitimise corruption.

The applicant had also challenged the second amendment to the law done by the government in which offences involving misappropriation of less than Rs500 million were taken out of the purview of the law.

During the hearing, the bench wondered as to how the amount deposited with the NAB would be reimbursed to the accused after the admission of guilt and entering a plea bargain.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan, a member of the bench, observed that the Supreme Court found that parliament’s supremacy was not unbridled but was subject to the Constitution, adding that accountability was one of the main principles in Islam and “if you take it out then you are discharging trust”.

PTI senior leaders Chaudhry Fawad Hussain, Senator Azam Swati and Maleeka Bukhari were present in the courtroom. The lawmakers prepared notes for media talk as they did during the hearing of Panamagate proceedings in the apex court.

It has been witnessed that since the Panama case, PTI's media policy is linked with the legal strategy and that the party had been successful to get favourable results.

During the hearing, counsel Haris focused on the amendment related to plea bargain while referring to the amendment in section 25b of NAO 1999.

Amendment in section 25b of NAO 1999 states that where an accused challenges the validity of order approving plea bargain or it comes to the knowledge of the court otherwise that the plea bargain was a result of duress, coercion or any other illegal pressure exerted on the accused during the course of inquiry or investigation, the court after hearing both the parties may recall the approval of plea bargain to the extent of that accused.

The counsel submitted that the amendment aimed at undoing all the plea bargains earlier entered into between the NAB and the accused, notwithstanding that such plea bargains were entered into after obtaining approval of court, and such approval was granted after hearing all the parties concerned.
“Thus the amendment is just a ruse to undo already concluded plea bargains, irrespective of whether these have been fully acted upon or not.”
The counsel further argued that the objective of the amendment appeared to undo the statements of all such accused who, after entering into plea bargain, had further become witnesses against the principal accused, and their testimony as such could be used against the principal accused.

“In some cases it may be designed to undo is also directed towards undoing all such plea bargains with a view to get such plea bargaining accused exonerated of the charges against them and to provide them an opportunity and facilitate them to claim back even that money which they had earlier deposited with NAB as a condition precedent for their release; and evidently this will lead to causing loss to the national exchequer as such money is meant to be and would have since been deposited with the appropriate government.”

CJP Bandial noted that this way the state would have to pay billions of rupees to the accused.
Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, another member of the bench, however, asked if taking money from the accused under pressure was correct.

He again asked the counsel why the petitioner (Imran Khan) did not raise the objections on these amendments in parliament. He wondered how the PTI chairman could walk out of the parliament without the wish of his constituency, wherein he was elected as MNA.
Justice Shah again said that the former premier could have raised these objections on amendments in the parliament.

Justice Ahsan while endorsing the petitioner concerns wondered whether those who had entered the plea bargain in the scams of below Rs500 million would approach the court for recovery as their cases did not fall in the NAB jurisdiction after new amendments.

The bench also noted that the recent amendments had decriminalise certain offences.

Counsel Haris said that concessions to the accused through these amendments were violative of Article 9 of the Constitution.

The CJP asked which concessions would be violative of the fundamental rights.

The hearing of case is adjourned till Thursday (today).

A government member revealed that concerns regarding these amendments were based on speculations as government attorney Makhdoom Ali Khan would strongly defend these amendments.

Meanwhile, the NAB submitted a written statement with the Supreme Court saying it would adopt submissions made by and on behalf of the federal government except any adverse statements and arguments advanced against it (NAB) in writing or oral.
The statement was submitted by Acting Additional Prosecutor General Chaudhry Mumtaz Yousuf.


----------



## ghazi52

.,.,
*ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial has been urged to immediately call the meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to fill the vacancies of the five judges in the Supreme Court.*

Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, who are members of the JCP, have written a letter to the CJP Bandial, who is also the Chairman of the Commission regarding the matter, and forwarded it to the other members of the JCP.

In the letter they stated; “In order to actualize the constitutional obligation under Article 175A(8) of the Constitution meetings of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) should automatically be scheduled at the earliest on the occurrence of any vacancy in the Supreme Court.

JCP is not the Supreme Court, but an independent constitutional body, that must have a separate and independent functional secretariat, headed by a professional secretary. This is essential to honour the constitutional obligation and to keep the constitutional courts fully functional in order to ensure speedy dispensation of justice across the country and to protect the right to access to justice of the people of Pakistan.

“Responsibility of the timely filling of the vacancies to a constitutional court falls primarily on the shoulders of every member of the JCP.

Any inordinate delay in the performance of this function, except for an unavoidable cause, which is not there in the present case, is both unfortunate and undesirable. Supreme Court has five vacancies that have piled up since February 2022 over a period of almost nine months. We as members of the JCP have time and again requested you to hold a meeting of the JCP to fill these vacancies.

“Our meetings with you in this regard have ended in vain. One of our senior colleagues and the member of the JCP Justice Qazi Faez Isa has already written to you in this regard on September 2022. It is important to underline that delay in filling the vacancy gives rise to unwanted rumours of petty politics, lobbying and quid pro quo appointments, which not only undermines the institutions but also seriously impairs the neutrality and the transparency of the appointment process.

‘Convene JC meeting to fill judges’ vacancies’, Justice Isa writes to CJP

“We have taken oath under the constitution to ‘preserve, protect and defend the constitution.”

“We are sure, your honour is aware of the legal position enunciated by the Supreme Court in Al-Jihad Trust case that permanent vacancies occurring in the offices of the judges, normally should be filled immediately (but) not later than 30 days,” from the date of occurrence of the vacancies, and that it is a “constitutional obligation” of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan “to ensure that the constitutional offices do not remain vacant and the vacancies are filled in without any delay.”

They wrote that the inordinate delay of almost nine months in this case must be urgently addressed first, in order to swiftly move forward to fill the current vacancies, we had proposed to you in our meetings to either (i) consider the five chief justice of the five High Courts and against the five vacant posts or (ii) consider the top two judges from every High Court and open these options to vote in the next meeting of the JCP. This is the best way forward in the current circumstances, till such time that a more sophisticated selection criteria and constitution compliant Rules are framed.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022


----------



## ghazi52

,.,.,.,
President Alvi approves elevation of three judges to Supreme Court​Naveed Siddiqui 
November 9, 2022 







This combination photo shows Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah (left), Justice Shahid Waheed of the Lahore High Court (middle) and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi of the Sindh High Court (right). — Photo courtesy: LHC/IHC/SHC websites

President Dr Arif Alvi on Wednesday approved the elevation of three high court judges to the Supreme Court (SC).

Under Article 175A of the Constitution, he approved outgoing Islamabad High Court (IHC) chief justice Athar Minallah, Sindh High Court Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Lahore High Court Justice Shahid Waheed to the apex court, a statement issued by the President’s Secretariat said.

President Alvi also approved Justice Aamer Farooq’s appointment as the IHC chief justice.

On Monday, the Parliamentary Committee on the Appointment of Judges had approved the elevation of Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi to the Supreme Court.
The eight-member panel, headed by Senator Farooq H. Naek, had examined the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) recommendations for elevating the two judges.

The committee had on November 4 approved the JCP’s recommendations for the promotion of Justice Minallah to the SC and Justice Farooq as the IHC chief justice, respectively. However, it had deferred the consideration of the names of Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi for its meeting slated for Nov 10.

Earlier on Nov 2, the committee had decided to consider the names on Nov 10. However, it gave the nod for the elevation of Justice Minallah on Nov 4 at an unscheduled meeting and cleared Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi on Monday at yet another unscheduled meeting.

On Oct 24, the JCP after a prolonged meeting of three-and-a-half hours had unanimously approved the promotion of Justice Minallah. It gave a divided nod to Justice Waheed and Justice Rizvi — both fourth on the seniority list of their respective courts — with a majority of five to four votes, but dropped outright the suggestion about the SHC’s Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui.

https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sha...awn.com/news/1719948&display=popup&ref=plugin


----------



## ghazi52

,..,,.
SC bars public office holders from using their photographs on govt documents, projects​Apex court notes action violates Constitution, undermines Pakistan’s Islamic moorings

Hasnaat Malik
November 23, 2022


The Supreme Court (SC) has barred public office holders, including politicians, from affixing their photographs on public and government documents terming it a violation of their oath.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa authored a five-page judgment while questioning affixing the photograph of then Chief Minister Chaudhary Pervez Elahi on the certificates of properties situated in a Rawalpindi katchi abadi.

According to the order, affixing one’s own photograph on a public/government document projects personal interest, therefore, this is not permissible as it would violate one’s oath of office. It is also not permissible to manoeuvre or honour oneself through one’s subordinates, political associates, or in a manner that may call for reciprocal favours.

"Paid servants of the State, constitutional office holders and politicians in government must not use their positions for personal, partisan or pecuniary gain. If someone names a public/government place or property after themselves or affixes their own name or image on a public/government document, it is self-glorification, and if this is done by others, it would constitute obedience, flattery, nepotism and/or corruption," added the order.

A division bench of the apex court comprising Justice Isa and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah further noted that the apparent reason to portray the image of the chief minister, who is a politician, could only be to present him to the recipients of the certificates as their benefactor and thus cultivate in them a feeling of being beholden to him.

"If the said gentleman wanted to help the homeless, nothing prevented him from distributing his own property, and, if he did so, he would be at liberty to affix his photograph on the documents of title. Self-projection on public/government records and self-aggrandisement at public expense is not permissible," noted the court order.

The court also said that Pakistan is not a kingdom, principality, or fiefdom in which the people are to be beholden to their rulers.

"We must remain constantly vigilant in maintaining the country's independence and democratic credentials. Politicians and anyone else who renders public service are best immortalised for what they did or stood for after their passing, if for no other reason than that during their lifetime, some unsavoury truth may be revealed about them, and the people may no longer want to honour them," the court order added.

The judgment also said that to "name public/government properties and anything planned, developed and/or managed from public/government funds or to project oneself, as in the present case by getting one’s photograph affixed on the sanads (certificates), violates the Constitution, undermines Pakistan’s Islamic moorings, is without lawful authority, and, if one may add, is also in bad taste".

The court further directed its office to send copies of this order to the cabinet secretary, to all the chief secretaries of the provinces, and to the chief commissioner administrator of Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) to issue requisite notifications reminding government servants that they serve the people, and not individuals in government and that they must strictly abide by paragraphs 9 to 13 of this judgement.


----------



## ghazi52

.,.
*The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday revoked former PTI leader Faisal Vawda’s lifetime disqualification as a lawmaker after he accepted misstating his dual nationality and apologised.*

However, Vawda remains disqualified under Article 63(1)(c) of the Constitution, under which a legislator loses membership of parliament for one term only.

Article 63(1)(c) says that a person will be disqualified from being elected or chosen member of parliament if he ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan or acquires the citizenship of a foreign state.

Vawda will remain disqualified till 2023 and is eligible to contest the next general or Senate elections, the court order said.

The verdict was issued by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and consisting of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ayesha A. Malik.

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had disqualified Vawda in February for concealing his US citizenship and directed him to return the salary and other benefits he had received as a minister and as a member of the National Assembly within two months. It had also de-notified him as a senator.

Subsequently, Vawda had contested his lifetime disqualification in the apex court on grounds that the ECP did not have the jurisdiction to disqualify him as a member of parliament.

At the last hearing, the three-member bench headed by the CJP had summoned Vawda to give him a chance to express his regret for misstating his dual nationality before the top court.

“We can call the gentleman to express regrets that he misstated before the court by presenting an affidavit to claim that his sole nationality is Pakistani,” the CJP had said, adding, “If the petitioner acknowledges his mistake, we will leave it to the electorate to decide his fate.”

In the order issued today, the SC bench observed that Vawda stated before the court that he “regrets” the claim of renunciation of US nationality in his nomination papers for elections in Karachi’s NA-249 constituency on June 7, 2018.

“He states he had already applied for such renunciation before the date of filing the nomination [papers]. His certificate for the loss of US nationality was issued to him on June 25, 2018,” the court order read, adding that as a result of the difference of dates, he was disqualified from contesting elections under Article 63(1)(c).

Consequently, an “erroneous statement” was made in the affidavit he submitted regarding his dual nationality to the returning officer, the court observed.

The matter was also addressed during the hearing when Justice Shah asked Vawda about the dates of the issuance of the renunciation certificate and his resignation from the National Assembly (NA).

Vawda told the court that the certificate was issued on June 25, 2018 while he vacated his NA seat on March 30, 2021.

“You remained a member of the NA for three years,” the CJP then said, adding that the court’s did not intend to summon and embarrass him “but you misled everyone for three years”.

The CJP directed him to apologise before the court and say that he was resigning as a senator.

“If you apologise and resign with good intent, the disqualification will be for five years. Otherwise, proceedings under Article 62(1)(f) will be carried out,” the CJP told Vawda.

According to Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) “unless — he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law”.

Following the CJP’s remarks, Vawda stated before the court that he was tendering an “unconditional apology”. He said he did not intend to give a false statement and would accept the court’s decision.

Subsequently, the court observed in its order that “he (Vawda) regrets and accepts that he stands disqualified from the term of the assembly until 2023,” the court order said.

The order said although Vawda was elected as a senator in 2021, in order to demonstrate good faith, he was resigning from the Senate seat until the period of his disqualification expired.

“In view of the said statement, the petitioner has submitted his signed apology.”

The court directed Vawda to submit his resignation to the Senate chairperson and concluded that he was qualified to contest the next general or Senate elections.

‘Legal error’​Speaking to the media after the hearing, Vawda maintained that he had committed a “legal error”.

“I committed a mistake legally. The court, too, has used the word error. It means it was a legal error,” he said. “I have been served justice, and I will resign [from the Senate] gracefully”,

Vawda also claimed that the CJP and his bench had said in their remarks that he had “shown character, grace, and inspiring confidence.

“This, coming from the Supreme Court’s highest panel, is an achievement for me in life.”

He went on to say that the SC had declared the ECP’s and Islamabad High Court’s orders regarding his disqualification “null and void”.

In response to a question, he said he had a relationship of “love and respect” with PTI chief Imran Khan and his association with him would continue.

He also denied that he was joining any party in the near future. “I am not joining any party for now. My politics may end here or it may go further. But I have this clarity that I am not joining any party.”

Dual nationality​_The News_ reported in January 2020 that Vawda was a dual national at the time of filing his nomination papers to the ECP to contest the 2018 general elections. Vawda submitted his nomination papers on June 11, 2018, which were approved by the election body a week later on June 18, the report said. However, the PTI MNA applied for the renunciation of his nationality with the US consulate at Karachi four days after the fact on June 22, 2018, the report revealed.

Qadir Khan Mandokhel, Mian Faisal and Mian Asif Mehmood subsequently filed petitions in the ECP on January 21, 2020, seeking Vawda’s disqualification. A citizen, Dost Ali, also filed a similar petition in 2020 challenging Vawda’s election as a member of the National Assembly. The petition stated that when Vawda filed his nomination papers for contesting elections, he held dual nationality as he was a US citizen as well.

A petition was also submitted to the Islamabad High Court seeking Vawda’s disqualification. The court had directed the PTI leader to submit a reply.

Despite the issuance of several notices, he did not respond to the petition. In March 2021, Vawda resigned as an MNA after being elected as a senator and his lawyer contended that a dual nationality case against the lawmaker was “not valid now”.

However, the IHC held him responsible for submitting a false affidavit regarding his nationality and directed the ECP to proceed against him under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution which deals with disqualification.

In November 2021, the senator filed a petition with the IHC seeking to stay proceedings of the ECP in his disqualification case but the court rejected the appeal.

Vawda’s counsel, Barrister Moeed, had then submitted the senator’s birth certificate to the ECP, stating that his client was born in California and was a US citizen by birth.

In February, the ECP disqualified PTI Senator Faisal Vawda as a lawmaker over the concealment of his dual nationality.

Vawda then moved the SC against his lifetime disqualification.

In his petition, he pleaded that it had been held by the apex court in the 2021 Allah Dino Bhayo case that the ECP was not a court of law within the context of Article 62(1)(f).

Moreover, this year, in the Muhammad Sulman case, the apex court held that the commission had no jurisdiction either under Article 218(3) of the Constitution or Section 9(1) of the Elections Act 2017 to deal with the qualification or disqualification of a returned candidate, the petition said.

Thus, the Feb 9 disqualification order of the ECP clearly negated the assumption of jurisdiction by the commission to disqualify Vawda for life, the petition contended.


----------



## ghazi52

,..,.,
Lawyers protested in front of the Supreme Court today and tried to wake up the justice from its deep sleep, but Zameen Janbad na Janbad Gul Muhammad.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1596153123902394368


----------



## ghazi52

.,.,,.
Editorial
International law and Pakistani attornies​ The Frontier Post

The Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial urged the government to keep international laws in mind while taking any decision, otherwise, the company will go to the international arbitration forum. The honorable Chief Justice observed these remarks during the hearing of the presidential reference regarding the revision of the mining contract on the Reko Diq project. According to the Chief Justice, there is a vast difference between the judicial system of Pakistan and the world, while improving the justice system was a big challenge for the judiciary. The Chief Adjudicator urged foreign investors to trust the justice system of Pakistan.

The famous Reko Deq gold mining case has attracted worldwide publicity, and public criticism due to imaginary tales of corruption, minerals confiscation as well as untrue human and property rights of Baloch people during the past decade. Political rivalry brought the issue to the Supreme Court amid intensified judicial activism. During the multiple hearing, neither government lawyers nor the company’s counsel appraised the court about binding clauses that might have legal and monetary consequences for the government at the international level. A three-member bench of the honorable Supreme Court canceled the Balochistan government contract with the foreign firm while declaring it contrary to public law. Later, the victim Tethyan company went to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) for financial compensation, which slapped Pakistan will a penalty of $ 5. 84 billion.

Presently, the Pakistani judiciary has struck a unique situation as its previous decision has exposed the country to an irreparable monetary loss. At the same time, its newest verdict can undo the mistakes of its predecessors, which clesrly exposes the weakness and fragility of our judicial system. Apparently, our judiciary solely depends on legal counsels while it does not have any system of cross-examination, or analytical research, therefore, a system that peers through others’ optics could not serve a speedy and impartial justice. Over the past seven decades, Pakistan’s judicial system is in the process of revolution and improvement, and still, our counsels and adjudicators are beginners in this field and the nation is paying a heavy price for their incompetence and over patriotism. Hence, how much time it would take to be fully groomed?


----------



## Signalian

@Mentee 

Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) in its National Corruption Perception Survey (NCPS) 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,* judiciary 3rd most corrupt* while education has climbed to 4th most corrupt since last NCPS 2021.









Police, judiciary among top three most corrupt institutions: survey


ISLAMABAD: Transparency International Pakistan in its National Corruption Perception Survey 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,...




www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> @Mentee
> 
> Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) in its National Corruption Perception Survey (NCPS) 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,* judiciary 3rd most corrupt* while education has climbed to 4th most corrupt since last NCPS 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police, judiciary among top three most corrupt institutions: survey
> 
> 
> ISLAMABAD: Transparency International Pakistan in its National Corruption Perception Survey 2022 found police the most corrupt, tendering and contracting was seen as the 2nd most corrupt,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk



Police is always politicised and is battered into submission by the powers to be e.g a bunch of kaptaan sb's abducting i.g sindh in the dead of the night which is a very recent ocurence . Then there are sector commanders going s.h.o over s.h.o's . Mind you these reports are made based on stats provided by the civil institutions--------- kuch idaaray to files daikhaana to darkinaar office k pass b pharknay nae dyty  

As for the judiciary well just leave it for another session.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> Police is always politicised and is battered into submission by the powers to be e.g a bunch of kaptaan sb's abducting i.g sindh in the dead of the night which is a very recent ocurence . Then there are sector commanders going s.h.o over s.h.o's . Mind you these reports are made based on stats provided by the civil institutions--------- kuch idaaray to files daikhaana to darkinaar office k pass b pharknay nae dyty
> 
> As for the judiciary well just leave it for another session.


You satisfied with the legal system provided to public in Pakistan ?


----------



## ghazi52

The law of Pakistan is inna lilla wana illiya rajiyun.
The courts of Pakistan are in a dead state. 
Their decisions are being made on the call of the facilitators.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> You satisfied with the legal system provided to public in Pakistan ?



Plz be specific as to what division of judicial system you are inquiring about? If it's narco related cases then nothing exceptional could be achieved except police throwing street level junkies into jail by over exaggerating their role and amount of drugs seized as you pretty well know who's been heading the d.g anf since past many decades .


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> Plz be specific as to what division of judicial system you are inquiring about? If it's narco related cases then nothing exceptional could be achieved except police throwing street level junkies into jail by over exaggerating their role and amount of drugs seized as you pretty well know who's been heading the d.g anf since past many decades .


Family courts


----------



## Mentee

ghazi52 said:


> ,..,.,
> Lawyers protested in front of the Supreme Court today and tried to wake up the justice from its deep sleep, but Zameen Janbad na Janbad Gul Muhammad.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1596153123902394368




Lawyers in punjab are going in full strike mode because of a brown uncle town of a Mr. justice ridiculing a junior lawyer over him not wearing a gown and then initiating contempt proceedings against a senior lawyer who offered that junior his own gown . 


Mr justice seems to be aping the colonial traditions mindlessly . They've got all the technicality nonsense without any substance.


----------



## Enigma SIG

How funny that the answer to each of Pakistans problems is Guillotine.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> Family courts



It's also a tricky case. A karnal sb in the recent past was found profoundly threatening a female judge for not giving him his choice of court date . Any civil servant might have immediately faced jail time for going monkey in a court room .


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> It's also a tricky case. A karnal sb in the recent past was found profoundly threatening a female judge for not giving him his choice of court date . Any civil servant might have immediately faced jail time for going monkey in a court room .


how many civil servants faced jail on this behavior ?



Mentee said:


> It's also a tricky case. A karnal sb in the recent past was found profoundly threatening a female judge for not giving him his choice of court date . Any civil servant might have immediately faced jail time for going monkey in a court room .


Also I was under the impression that military doesnt go through courts, you narrate a strange case. Its always some colonel or captain in your story. seems a contradiction to popular beliefs in Pakistan.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> how many civil servants faced jail on this behavior ?



For contempt, I don't recall any govt employee other than an a.c some years ago and a d.c . That a.c dude was under some sort of colonial hangover so much so that he threatened the judge with shutting down his court ------ the court bailiff however swiftly retorted back with hand cuffing the lard sb . 


As for the rest , they are mostly professionals and dont creat ruckus like these f.a /b.a pass wanna be brown viceroys. Vip treatment to aysay maangty hain jaysy Neuro surgeon ho' n 




Signalian said:


> Also I was under the impression that military doesnt go through courts, you narrate a strange case. Its always some colonel or captain in your story.



Obviously The offsprings wont be filing suits related to matrimonial issues with the jag branch


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> For contempt, I don't recall any govt employee other than an a.c some years ago and a d.c . That a.c dude was under some sort of colonial hangover so much so that he threatened the judge with shutting down his court ------ the court bailiff however swiftly retorted back with hand cuffing the lard sb .
> 
> 
> As for the rest , they are mostly professionals and dont creat ruckus like these f.a /b.a pass wanna be brown viceroys. Vip treatment to aysay maangty hain jaysy Neuro surgeon ho' n
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously The offsprings wont be filing suits related to matrimonial issues with the jag branch


I will feel so much at home in courts then.
Love Pakistan Army for accomodating me anywhere in Pakistan 😎

That military connection is priceless.


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> For contempt, I don't recall any govt employee other than an a.c some years ago and a d.c . That a.c dude was under some sort of colonial hangover so much so that he threatened the judge with shutting down his court ------ the court bailiff however swiftly retorted back with hand cuffing the lard sb .
> 
> 
> As for the rest , they are mostly professionals and dont creat ruckus like these f.a /b.a pass wanna be brown viceroys. Vip treatment to aysay maangty hain jaysy Neuro surgeon ho' n
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously The offsprings wont be filing suits related to matrimonial issues with the jag branch


and also, LAW GAT, any advice on that ?


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> and also, LAW GAT, any advice on that ?




Chup kr k jo kr rhy ho vhi kro as showing this kind of e.i.company loyalty you'd prolly end up being boycotted by the bar or worst ------. Vaha Vigo on demand nahi aati.


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> Chup kr k jo kr rhy ho vhi kro as showing this kind of e.i.company loyalty you'd prolly end up being boycotted by the bar or worst ------. Vaha Vigo on demand nahi aati.


Lawyers don't judge others, they investigate. You should investigate more before you suggest anything. Complete your homework. 

You know I don't always go in the battlefield just for myself.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> Lawyers don't judge others, they investigate. You should investigate more before you suggest anything. Complete your homework.
> 
> You know I don't always go in the battlefield just for myself.



Kon log ho yar tsi

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> Kon log ho yar tsi


Advocacy is a mindset.

I don’t want to be the one saying it but - you learnt nothing from Jinnah.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> Advocacy is a mindset.
> 
> I don’t want to be the one saying it but - you learnt nothing from Jinnah.





No offence taken but its just that when you start hanging military chiefs photo frame right beside of the founding father the perception changes drastically. Gotta unlearn rule of law and equity witnessing this jinnah's ideals being hijacked by the g -3 .


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> No offence taken but its just that when you start hanging military chiefs photo frame right beside of the founding father the perception changes drastically. Gotta unlearn rule of law and equity witnessing this jinnah's ideals being hijacked by the g -3 .


Values first yeah  

You portrayed what I have seen in judiciary and all over Pakistan in private and public offices. 

But 'nuff talk, what about nego' skills ?


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> But 'nuff talk, what about nego' skills ?




You don't see the legal fraternity poking their nose into any other institution like overtaking almost every dept under gop. Kia hm koi hawaldar hain jo without skills and experience qabzay shoro kr dy ?


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> You don't see the legal fraternity poking their nose into any other institution like overtaking almost every dept under gop. Kia hm koi hawaldar hain jo without skills and experience qabzay shoro kr dy ?


You already became a havaldar without ever joining army because of your scapegoat mentality.

So in all the cases you handle, you rely on only one scapegoat ? How does being narrow sighted help you.

Jinnah was much more than that but all you could gather about him is his photo being used in offices, isn’t that a pathetic representation of a man who is much more than a decorated pic on a wall, it’s a pity you cast him so low since you can’t get over the fact that you need to make a repetitive scapegoat which can and will cloud your mind to hinder your judgement while it has already maligned your foresight.

Jinnah is much more than that but now I see why the suits can’t do an iota of what they did back in 07/08.


----------



## Mentee

Signalian said:


> You already became a havaldar without ever joining army because of your scapegoat mentality.
> 
> So in all the cases you handle, you rely on only one scapegoat ? How does being narrow sighted help you.
> 
> Jinnah was much more than that but all you could gather about him is his photo being used in offices, isn’t that a pathetic representation of a man who is much more than a decorated pic on a wall, it’s a pity you cast him so low since you can’t get over the fact that you need to make a repetitive scapegoat which can and will cloud your mind to hinder your judgement while it has already maligned your foresight.
> 
> Jinnah is much more than that but now I see why the suits can’t do an iota of what they did back in 07/08.



Fruit comparison at best . What this piece of philosophy got to do with the situation at hand ?


----------



## Riz

Please correct the thread title its supreme kootha not court

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Mentee said:


> Fruit comparison at best . What this piece of philosophy got to do with the situation at hand ?


At least it’s not a blame game that you will blame everything on one entity which is not even related to 99% of problems that a common man faces in Pakistan.

It’s like a client comes to lawyer with a problem. Lawyers response is blaming military after taking fee and showing inability to do anything. 

You needed a scapegoat, you got it mate 👍🏻


----------



## ghazi52

,,.,.
SC bars premature transfers in police departments​Haseeb Bhatti 
December 15, 2022

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the governments of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to implement the Police Order 2002 in order to stamp out unease among the public owing to growing crimes and barred premature transfers and posting in the police department.

A three-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ayesha Malik and Justice Athar Minallah issued these directives while hearing a petition against chronic political interference in the transfers and postings of the Punjab police.

In their petitions, Rana Tahir Saleem and Mohammad Javaid apprised the court of the alleged violation of Police Order 2002, mentioning that nine Lahore capital city police officers (CCPOs) and eight inspector generals of police (IGP) were changed between June 7, 2018 and Aug 29, 2022.

The frequent reshuffles reflected that the CCPOs and IGPs had average tenures of 4.5 and 6.2 months only, respectively, according to the petitions.

With the commencement of the hearing today, CJP Bandial noted that officials at the helm must put on record the reasons if any transfer within the police department was inevitable.

“No officer should be removed without the consultation of a senior officer,” he remarked.

The chief justice asked whether the same “formula for good governance” will be pursued in Sindh and Balochistan as well [for the reformation of police working].

He also sought details from Sindh and Balochistan police departments about transfers and postings.

“Will the Punjab government enforce the law or should the court issue directions on it?” CJP questioned while asking authorities to seek a reply from the Punjab government and submit the same before the court.

He stated that people were being affected due to growing crime, adding that police officers should not be transferred at the behest of any MPA.

He observed that appointing a DPO or a CPO was the prerogative of the inspector general of police.

“There is no bar on the premature removal of officers under the law, but the prescribed procedure should be followed,” he said, adding there was a general perception that government uses the police as a political weapon.

Investigation officers should ideally be kept away from other irrelevant work and there should be a separate cadre from them to function properly, he suggested.

CJP Bandial lamented that the police lacked investigative skills.

“Poor evidence is presented in the court that ultimately benefits suspects,” the chief justice observed.

Punjab Advocate General Ahmad Awais told the court that transfers within the department were taking place after consultations.


----------



## ghazi52

,..,.,
SC orders to impose Police Order 2002​
Umer Gujjar









ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday ordered the governments of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces to impose Police Order 2002 in a case against transfers and postings of police officers on political grounds.

The court also stopped the provincial governments from transferring the police officers before the time mentioned in the law. The top court said that it was compulsory to write the reasons if the transfer before time was necessary and no officer would be removed from the post without the advice of a senior officer.

Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial remarked that police officers shouldn’t be transferred on the recommendation of MPAs. District police officer (DPO) and city police officer (CPO) couldn’t be removed before three years in accordance with the law, he observed, adding that the law didn’t prohibit transfers before time but the legal procedure should be followed.

The chief justice remarked that there was an impression that the government had been using police departments for political gains. The investigation officers should be at a distance from other police affairs as per the law, he said, adding that even the IOs should be given separate cadres.

The CJP observed that there was no expertise in the police regarding the investigation. The weak evidence used to be produced during the trial which benefits the accused, he added.
The court said the FIR regarding the attack on former prime minister Imran Khan was not being registered due to political interference and then this court had to give directions.

The apex court remarked why not the same formula of good governance should be applied in Sindh and Balochistan provinces as well.

The SC also sought report from provincial governments regarding the transfers of police officials during the last ten years.

The CJP remarked whether the Punjab government would act as per the law itself or this court should issue an order in this regard. He remarked that the public was facing hardships due to increasing crime and insecurity.

Advocate General Punjab argued that the transfers of the police officers were being made after consultation. The court then adjourned further hearing of the case till the second week of January.


----------



## ghazi52

NBP employees are not govt servants: SC​Terence

*ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court held that employees of the National Bank of Pakistan (NBP) are not “government servants” or “civil servants” as defined in the Civil Servants Act, 1973.*

The judgment authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah said that the NBP, as per Section 3(2) of the National Bank of Pakistan Ordinance, 1949, is a body corporate, and its employees are employees of a statutory corporation, not of the federal government.

“We are cognizant of the legal position that the NBP, being a statutory corporation, is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 199 of the Constitution and its employees when are governed or proceeded against under the statutory rules can also avail the recourse to the writ jurisdiction for the redressal of their grievances in respect of their service matters.”

However, this legal position does not merge the NBP, a separate juristic person, into the federal government, nor in any manner blur the distinction between NBP a Statutory Corporation and the federal government, a constitutional body or in any manner turn the employees of the NBP into the employees of the federal government, said SC judgment.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar passed the verdict against the judgment of Peshawar High Court (PHC) dated 01.10.2019.

The petitioner, Muhammad Naeem, an employee of the NBP, had challenged the said notification of the Finance Division dated 30-12-2015 and the circular of Head Office of the NBP dated 15-01-2016 in the PHC through a writ petition, asserting that the employees of the NBP are government servants/ officers as they fall within the scope of the definition of “public servant” provided in clause ninth of Section 21 and Explanation of Section 161 of the PPC.

The PHC dismissed the writ petition on 01.10.2019, by holding that the NBP is a statutory body and its employees are not civil servants or government servants.

The petitioner approached the apex court against the PHC verdict.

The Court clarified that the terms “civil servant” and “government servant”, having almost the same meaning and scope, are commonly used interchangeably in the civil service laws of Pakistan.

The term “public servant” as defined in Section 21 of the PPC for the purpose of application of that law is; however, of wide import and scope than those terms. It cannot; therefore, be referred to or used as an equivalent or synonym of them, in the context of a person’s civil status, capacity or position.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022


----------



## ghazi52

,..,,.
SC sets rules for altering division bench verdict​Says at least its three-member bench can modify, alter or amend the judgment of a divisional bench of a high court

Hasnaat Malik
December 23, 2022






A general view of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Islamabad, Pakistan April 4, 2022. PHOTO: REUTERS*

ISLAMABAD: *The Supreme Court has held that at least its three-member bench can modify, alter or amend the judgment of a divisional bench of a high court.
A five-page judgment authored by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar maintained this while accepting a review petition filed by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) through its counsel Faisal Siddiqi.

"With all humility to our command, we agree that the two Member Bench, taking into consideration the assiduousness and exactitudes of Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, could grant leave or dismiss the civil petition for leave to appeal, but could not modify, alter or amend the judgment of Divisional Bench of High Court for which the matter should have been fixed before a three Member Bench as per the aforesaid Rules," the judgment noted.

A three-judge bench of the apex court led by Justice Sardar Tariq Masood said that the command and dominance of Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, is germane to the constitution of benches which unequivocally expounds and enlightens that every cause, appeal or matter shall be heard and disposed of by a bench consisting ofnnot less than three judges to be nominated by the chief justice.

It said that all petitions for leave to appeal, appeals from appellate and revisional judgments, and orders made by a single judge in the high court, and appeals from judgments/orders of the service tribunals or administrative courts, and appeals involving grant of bail/cancellation of bail may be heard and disposed of by a bench of two judges, adding that the chief justice may, in a fit case, refer any cause or appeal as aforesaid to a larger bench.

The court noted that in the instant case, the bench was inclined to grant leave to appeal to a limited extent vis-à-vis the rate of mark-up, adding that it was also a “ground reality” that no leave to appeal was granted by this court against the judgment of the high court.

“It is evident from the order of this court that on the sole statement of the counsel for the respondent No1, the alleged excessive rate of markup was simultaneously modified in the judgment without recording any consensual statement of the petitioner’s counsel.”

The judgment also noted that it was “lucidly translucent without any shadow of doubt that while modifying the judgment of the high court, no leave to appeal was granted by this court, rather the judgment conspicuously reflects that this Court was inclined to grant leave to appeal only for the reason that the rate of 10 percent markup per annum on the value of dollar seemed to be excessive, but on the request of learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, that his client was willing to accept any reduced rate of mark-up, the judgment of the High Court was modified while rebuffing the plea of limitation”.

The review petition was allowed and the main petition restored, which shall be fixed for hearing before a three member-bench for leave to appeal.


----------



## ghazi52

Is this true????


----------

