Cases come to courts due to bad governance: Constitutional bench

ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench on Friday observed that due to bad governance, cases come to courts, seeking progress report from the governments in the case of October 2005 earthquake victims.

The six-member Constitutional Bench headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan heard multiple cases related to different maters. Others members of the bench are Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Masarat Hilali.

The court sought progress report stating as to who was responsible for the delay in resettlement and projects.

Justice Rizvi observed that 19 years have passed since the earthquake of 2005, and in such a long time, the children would have become young and the youth would be old.

The judge further asked as to what the authorities have done so far for the rehabilitation of the victims. Similarly, Justice Mandokhail questioned as to why was forest land allotted for building houses after the earthquake.

The government should have given money to the victims instead of getting into the cycle of construction, he remarked, adding that had the victims got money, they would have built their own houses by now.

“I have seen the devastation of the earthquake victims with my own eyes,” Justice Hilali observed.

Justice Afghan observed that the rehabilitation of the earthquake victims was to be done with the cooperation of the federation and the province.

Natural disasters cannot be prevented, but they can be fought, he remarked, adding that the victims were suffering due to bad governance and non-cooperation of the departments, and that due to bad governance, cases come to courts.

Justice Mazhar questioned as to how many people were affected by the earthquake and how many houses had been built for the victims. Justice Amin-ud-din questioned as to how much funds had come for the victims and how much was utilised for the rehabilitation.

Similarly, the bench while hearing a case related to deforestation, sought report from the federal and provincial governments, stating as to how much area of the forest land has been occupied and evicted.

The court further asked as to what steps had been taken to stop deforestation and action taken against those responsible.

Justice Mandokhail observed that farm houses and housing societies were being built behind Margalla Hills adding that with the connivance of government officials, encroachment and cutting occurs on the forest area.

Meanwhile, the bench disposed of as withdrawn a matter related to postings and transfers of judges.

During the hearing Justice Mandokhail observed that the transfer and posting policy of judges was the work.

Petitioner Mian Dawood told the court that in one year, three chief justices were changed in the Lahore High Court, adding that every chief justice had transferred other judges.

Justice Mandokhail asked the petitioner as to whether high court was independent or not.

The petitioner replied that the high court was independent but guidelines for policy were necessary. Justice Mandokhail then told the petitioner that if they (judges) were free, let them do their work.

“I agree that there should be a policy regarding postings and transfers but it is not our job,” he remarked.

“We are not accepting your plea today,” Justice Amin-ud-din told the petitioner to which the petitioner pleaded to allow him to go to the high court.

Meanwhile, the court disposed of the petition as withdrawn.

Likewise, the bench, while hearing a petition related to teaching young children how to live, issued notices to the attorney general, advocate generals and parties, and adjourned the matter for four weeks. During the hearing, Salman Akram Raja advocate told the court that the petition had been filed on behalf of innocent children of Pakistan, adding that children were not taught in schools as to how to live.

He submitted that close relatives are often involved in child abuse and such nature of incidents are not reported due to being a close relative.

Justice Mazhar asked the petitioner as to whether he wanted it to be included in educational curriculum. Raja replied in affirmative. Later, the court adjourned the matter for four weeks. Similarly, the bench, hearing a matter related to construction of Nai Gaj Dam, sought report from the federal government providing cut-of date of for its construction and cost.

As per information available on Wikipedia Nai Gaj Dam is currently under construction on the River Gaj and at the edge of Kirthar Mountains, north west of Dadu City in Dadu District, Sindh province.

During the hearing, Justice Mandokhail questioned as to why the project had not yet been completed.

The counsel for the construction consortium told the court that the funds settled for the project were not being released.

Justice Mandokhail further questioned as to why the government was not doing its job. Whether it is the job of court to construct dams,” Justice Mandokhail asked and added that the court is being burdened of work as the government is not doing its job.

The additional advocate general, however, told the court that project could be completed well on time if funds were available.

Justice Rizvi observed that the project was to be completed in two years. The counsel told the court that project of Rs30 billion would now reach to Rs100 billion, adding that a plan for the construction was being made for third time.

The counsel claimed that the consortium had done more work than the funds received for the project. The public lawyer, however, told the court that project was delayed due to floods.

Later, the bench adjourned the matter for six weeks after directing the federal government to submit report, stating the cut-of date for completion of the project and budget allocated for it as well.