Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story


June 15, 2006 Thursday Jumadi-ul-Awwal 18, 1427



No handover of PSM till verdict, court assured



By Nasir Iqbal


ISLAMABAD, June 14: The Supreme Court was assured on Wednesday that the Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM) will not be handed over to the new management till its hearing on accusations of non- transparency in the multi-billion sale is over.

“We can not show disrespect to this court,” senior counsel for the federal government Abdul Hafeez Pirzada said — an assurance also endorsed by the counsel for the Privatisation Commission Sharifuddin Pirzada.

It is a well-establish practice that nothing is done on pending matters, Sharifuddin Pirzada explained.

Barrister Zafarullah Khan, chief of the Watan Party who has challenged the sale of country’s biggest industrial concern to a consortium of three-bidders for Rs21.68 billion, has invited the attention of the court towards the fact that its embargo against the transfer of management to the new bidders was coming to an end on Thursday.

Mujeeb Pirzada, representing the Pakistan Steel Peoples Workers Union also requested the apex court to extend the stay.

Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, who is leading a nine-member bench hearing the challenge against PSM privatisation, however observed that the commission probably would not transfer possession to the new buyer pending instant petition.

Justice Karamat Nazir Bhandari, a member of the bench observed during the hearing that perhaps after May 29, 1997 no meeting of the Council of Common Interest (CCI) was held and inquired from Hafeez Pirzada whether a constitutional functionary (CCI) could abdicate its function to another body (cabinet) and go to sleep. “Would it not amount to the subversion of the constitution,” the judge inquired.

Hafeez Pirzada however replied that the CCI had not delegated its power to the cabinet committee rather it had authorized it to deal with the matters of privatisations. The CCI has not gone to sleep, he said and recalled that its meeting was also called in 1998 during the period of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif but his government was ousted.

He also informed the apex court that the process of nomination of members to represent the federal government in the CCI was “well under way” but not completed so far.

Somehow an impression has emerged; Justice Javed Iqbal observed that we were undermining the authority of the council by sometimes substituting it with the cabinet committee or by the cabinet secretary when the real purpose of the council was to safeguard the interest of the federating units.

“In my humble opinion, CCI is yet to be constituted and that the matter of privatisation of the steel mills has yet to be taken to it,” the judge said.

The matter has already been taken to the CCI in 1997 and its policies regarding entire privatisation process has attained finality, Pirzada replied adding no appeal had ever been made by any party (provinces) to the joint sitting of the parliament or any direction was issued by the parliament since 1997. Even the parliament has not taken any suo motu action in this regard.

He referred to Section 27 of the Privatisation Commission Ordinance 2000 and explained that the law conferred powers on the federal government to reopen a privatisation deal within a year. However, Justice Javed Iqbal observed that it was very difficult to complain against a transaction which had been approved by the prime minister.

Half of its tenure a succeeding government spent is on un- doing what the earlier governments did for which huge spending are also made, Pirzada deplored and dubbed this practice as “despicable.”

This is not appreciable; Chief Justice observed adding normally this happened in developing countries while the developed countries always continue policies.

It is institutions that make the state, Pirzada said adding in our country norms had become aberrations while aberrations become norms. No country, he said, could survive without protection to its legal system but here the old legal order was destroyed and substituted by a new one whenever a military takeover occurred in the name of revolution.

“You can not destroy the legal system.” “If legal system goes, the whole country goes with it,” he said.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2006