Plea against proposed amendments: Hypothetical questions posed in petition, says SC registrar

ISLAMABAD: The Registrar Office of the Supreme Court on Thursday returned with objections the petition filed in the apex court against the proposed amendments to the Constitution, saying that hypothetical questions have been posed in it.

Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) former president and Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) member Abid Shahid Zubairi, along with other members of the council, had filed a joint petition in the apex court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. They had prayed the apex court to declare the proposed Constitutional Package as ultra vires to the basic scheme of the Constitution, principle of separation of powers, independence of judiciary and fundamental rights enshrined under the Constitution.

The Registrar Office, however, returned the petition by raising objections that the petition has been filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution to challenge a document which has not yet attained the status of a law and it is stated to be a ‘proposed law’, not yet introduced in parliament.

It was further objected that it would be the MNAs and senators who may pass a bill if and when presented, so they are not arrayed as parties.

Similarly, the office objected that the federation, provinces, principal secretary to the prime minister and president who are listed as respondents are not members of parliament. It was further objected that respondent No 9 & 10 cannot be arrayed as parties in view of Article 248 of the Constitution, adding that under the Constitution the power to make laws vests in the legislature and the same cannot be curtailed before a law is made.

The Registrar Office further objected that hypothetical questions are posed in the petition and the petitioners have mentioned that they are advocates and members of the Pakistan Bar Council whereas the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act stipulates that lawyers should not become parties. The office stated that if the petitioners have a grievance and want to be portrayed as PBC members, they should first approach their respective bodies, i.e. SCBA and PBC for authorising them to represent these bodies.

Similarly, it was further stated that the interim order in the case of Raja Amer Khan v The Federation of Pakistan passed in CP 6 of 2023 (at page 52 of the petition) cannot be considered by this office as a binding decision under Article 189 of the Constitution.

It is pertinent to mention here that after filing the petition, Abid Zubairi on Wednesday had requested the Supreme Court to fix the petition for early hearing.

Meanwhile, another petition challenging the proposed constitutional amendments to the Constitution was filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday.

Azhar Siddique, Ahmed Khan, Imtiaz Mehmood, Ejaz Shafi and Abdullah advocates filed the joint petition in the apex court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. They have made the Federation through the law secretary, Punjab province through chief secretary as respondents.

The petitioners prayed the apex court that the proposed amendments sought to be introduced through a bill may kindly be set aside and be declared ultra vires in view of Articles 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10-A, 16, 17, 25, 68, 63A, 175A, 184, 199 read with Articles 4 and 5 of the Constitution read with principles laid down by the Supreme Court.

They further prayed that separation of powers and independence of judiciary and its powers and functions to enforce the fundamental rights be kindly declared as sacrosanct under the Constitution and beyond the power and competence of parliament to withdraw, interfere or tamper with in any manner whatsoever.

They prayed that the apex court to restrain the federal government from tabling the bill, and the operation of the proposed amendments sought to be introduced through the bill may kindly be suspended and the same be restrained from being assented to if passed by both houses of parliament.