April 25, 2008	Friday	Rabi-us-Sani 18, 1429

LAHORE, April 24: The Lahore High Court has ruled that an advocate general under the Constitution can attend the proceedings of the provincial assembly and address the members to explain a constitutional and legal point.

"Under Article 111 of the Constitution, the Advocate General has the right to sit in and address the provincial assembly and he can also be appointed a member to any committee of the provincial assembly. In fact, he has all the rights which an elected member may have except a right to vote," Justice Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi and Justice Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan said.

The bench gave the ruling in its detailed judgment in a petition challenging the appointments of additional advocate generals and assistant advocate generals in Punjab.

The division bench observed that the constitutional office of the advocate general tendered advice on issues, which were referred by the provincial government or its different departments. "Besides assisting the superior courts in all cases of public importance, particularly, where interpretation of constitutional points involved, the advocate general has to protect public rights in cases of public nuisance and also protect public charities," the court held.

"Another very vital unwritten function of the Advocate General is to work as a bridge between the Provincial Government and the High Court. The Chief Justice of High Court has to perform several administrative functions besides his judicial functions. In this regard, a regular communication is required to deal with several matters," the bench held.

Earlier on April 3, the bench had disposed off the petition by issuing a short order and also defined a criteria for the appointment of advocate general with an observation that in future the governor of Punjab shall appoint a person, qualified to be appointed as a judge of the high court, to be the advocate general for the province with prior 'consultation' with the chief justice/high court.

The bench had also defined the criteria for the appointments of additional and assistant advocate generals in a province and directed the authorities concerned to examine the appointments of law officers, called in question, within 40 days in the light of court's findings and observations.

Muhammad Ashraf Khan had filed the petition, stating the appointments of the law officers were made in derogation of the rules. He also referred a notification dated October 19, 1993, to be read with articles 139 and 140 of the Constitution. He pleaded that the expression "determine" is significant and it must be construed objectively taking into account purpose of establishment of constitutional office of the advocate general, Punjab.

The petitioner said the Punjab governor, by making an amendment in the Law Department Manual 1938, had made it binding for the government to consult CJ before filling the seats of additional and assistant advocates general. But, the same practice had not been followed while appointing 19 law officers, he added.

He said the number of law officers already working was enough to meet the cases because LHC had only 35 judges at its strength. He pointed out that these appointments would not only put unnecessary burden on public exchequer, it had been done to dent lawyers' unity they had shown while agitating against `suspension’ of the chief justice of Pakistan on March 9 last.

He said the competency and eligibility of the lawyers had never been considered while some of them had either resigned or were dismissed from the prosecution wing of the Punjab government were re-appointed.

On his petition, the bench had issued directions to the Punjab government for refiguring the number of law officers, setting a criteria for their induction and making all appointments including that of the advocate general after "prior consultation" with the chief justice of the Lahore High Court.

The bench ordered that the validity of the appointments of the respondents - 19 law officers listed in the petition - shall be examined within next 40 days. The bench decided: "The Punjab government will determine the posts of additional advocates-general, assistant-advocates general after consultation with the chief justice while keeping in view the number of judges of the Supreme Court, high court and other courts and tribunals."

The court had also set a criteria for the post of AGP saying that a person qualified to be appointed as a judge of the high court would only be made AGP with prior consultation with the CJ. Likewise, the posts of additional-advocates general and assistant advocates general would also be filled with consultation of CJ in addition to other qualifications provided in Law Department Manual (1938).