September 22, 2003	Monday	Rajab 24, 1424

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, Sept 21: After agreeing to one-year extension in the retirement age of the judges of the superior courts, the government is having second thought, according to official sources privy to the government-MMA talks.

The judges of the Supreme Court and all high courts were given three-year extension on Oct 9, 2002. The Bar of the country has staunchly opposed the extension, and termed it “dubious gift” from the military government for the judiciary. The Bar’s demand turn down the extension offer has not been accepted by the judiciary.

The official sources said that when the proposed constitutional package was placed before the Cabinet, it did not agree to the MMA’s demand for just one-year extension to judges.

The federal minister for information announced at a press conference that the MMA’s demand with regard to the extension could not be accepted.

The minister’s statement was rebutted within hours by an announcement by the government which was faxed to the newspaper offices by Press Information Department, saying that the issue of the extension would be decided in consultation with the MMA.

The sources said that the rebuttal to the minister’s statement came from Tariq Aziz, the “main political mapper” of Musharraf government who along with Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and S. M. Zafar, had held negotiations with the MMA.

If everything goes well, the government would also accept the MMA’s demand that the judiciary should be administered fresh oath, the sources said.

The opposition parties are demanding fresh oath to all the judges who had taken oath “to abide by the provisions of the proclamation of Emergency of the Fourteenth day of October, 1999, and Provisional Constitutional Order No. 1 of 1999”.

Those who had refused to abide by the PCO had to go out of the judiciary and six of them were Supreme Court judges including Chief Justice Saiduz Zaman Siddiqui.

The government had earlier taken the stance that in view of the deeming clause (section 270 C) in the LFO, there was no need for fresh oath even to those judges who were inducted in the judiciary by the military government.

Out of 18 judges of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Shaikh Riaz Ahmad and Justice Munir A. Sheikh are the only two judges who had taken oath under the Constitution and also under the PCO.

All the remaining judges who are brought to the apex court have only taken oath under the PCO.

Situation in the high courts is also not different where overwhelming number of judges are those who are inducted in the institution by the military government.

The government’s only apprehension is that if the judges of superior judiciary, including the chief justice, are administered fresh oath, the oath of office of President Gen Pervez Musharraf who was administered oath by the chief justice on Nov 16, 2002, would become contentious.

SCBA President Hamid Khan, who has been opposing the extension to the judges, said there could not be “deeming clause” with regard to the oath.

If it was possible to have a deeming clause about the oath, then the military government would not have taken the trouble of asking the judges to take fresh oath under the PCO three years ago, and it would have simply issued an order that all the judges would be deemed to have been working under the PCO.