Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to
Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar on Tuesday said the Supreme Court's queries to better understand others' perspective should not be construed as the court's interference in the legislative process.
The chief justice made those remarks while heading a three-member SC bench hearing a case about the media commission
"Yesterday it was again asked how the judiciary could interfere with the legislative process," the chief justice said, without naming anyone.
"Parliament is supreme but there is also the Constitution above it," he said, adding that no legislation could be done in violation of the Constitution.
Justice Nisar was referring to remarks given by Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in the National Assembly on Monday in which he severely criticised the recent judicial activism, alleging that it was badly affecting the functioning of his government.
The prime minister had also lamented over the passing of alleged derogatory remarks by certain judges for elected representatives.
“I was not willing to say this but it had become necessary. The elected representatives of the 207 million people are being dubbed as thief, robber and mafia. Sometimes threats are being hurled that we [judges] will nullify the legislation that you [parliamentarians] have passed,” Abbasi said in his apparent reference to the ongoing hearing of the petitions challenging the Elections Act 2017 which enabled disqualified prime minister Nawaz Sharif to re-assume the office of the party president.
CJP Nisar also addressed this allegation, saying the court asks questions to understand issues better.
"Headlines get made when we ask questions even though our remarks are to understand each others' point of view. If we question whether or not a certain person is qualified [to hold public office] then is that akin to insulting the parliament? Is asking a question also insulting a parliamentarian?"
The chief justice said he is neither giving a clarification nor is he liable to give one, adding: "We do not want to make clarifications our weakness."
"We will not be deterred. In fact, we will, with the best of intent, utilise the power that the Constitution and the law has given us."
'We have to make Pemra autonomous'
The chief justice said during the hearing that it seems the recommendations of the media commission report about making the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) independent and subsequent government promises have seen little progress.
“The government should not command and dictate a regulatory authority such as Pemra,” said Justice Nisar. “We have to make Pemra an ideal and autonomous body.”
The court then directed the deputy attorney general to submit a report about steps taken for Pemra's independence after consultation with the Prime Minister's Office and relevant ministries.
The court also issued notices to all media houses, directing them to submit their reports on payment of employee salaries within seven days.
Comments (68) Closed
Constitution is will of people of Pakistan made through the parliment. No one can bind parliment to follow certain path. Will of people is a dynamic process and with time Parliment to make any change
Cjp is only man who is working with true spirit. He is not getting any pressure.This is what democracy needs in actual sense..
Excellent CJ. Some inept and uncouth lot who call themselves 'parliamentarians' needs to be taught a lesson with imprisonment and disqualification, like Nehal Hashmi.
Constitution can always be amended by the parliament,as and when required by its 2/3rd majority.
The constitution is above all. All institutions including Parliament is subordinate to the constitution. It is pointed out that present paliament consists of those who are ineligible to sit in Parliament in accordance with the limtations prescribed by article 62 and 63 of the constitution. The present Parliament does not deserve the due respect to that of the Parliament that might be consttuted and established within the parameters and qualifications enshrined in the constitution. Article 62 and 63 are the prerequisites conditions to be fulfilled by those who wish to file nomination papers prior to contest election.
Very true. Constitution is the guiding light for Parliament to follow. Oath is taken under constitution.
Hats off to CJP - these thieves are crying as their wrong doings are being questioned
Laws should for the betterment of common people. Remember democracy is government of the people, by the people and for the people. If you make a dishonest person a party leader then it would not be for the betterment of people. Parliament should think about it before making such laws.
Unfortunately the Constitution is compromised by the Parliament to its own advantage. There should be process to get the judiciary involved in approving changes and major amendments that can jeopardize national interests of the state.
That’s the preamble of our constitution which gives right to the judiciary to be independent.
It is essential that all institutions remain within their constitutional limits for the national interest.
Constitution was made by the parliament and it has all the right to amend it.
CJ you are doing a fine job but these so called parliamentarians are abusing power and keeping the massses under control by using all sorts means including extra judicial killings. What have done for the poor people? Is education, water health improved? Is police approachable? Can someone transfer land registration without hefty bribe? This PM and both houses are waste of public resources.
Well said and it is true.
Well said sir. I salute you.
Constitution is made by assemblies and Democratic govt in parliaments, not by judges; judges only interpret what has been allowed in the constitution, so no one is above the parliament that is what democracy is all about.
judiciary likewise all institutions should keep check and balance on each other and thier remarks should be made public
change
I agree, parliament is supreme, but, our SC and judiciary is above all institutions and their responsibility is to ensure that country's constitution is not abused and changed unnecessarily for the sake of protecting a few corrupt politicians. I have full faith on our SC, as they will NOT allow any unconstitutional changes that will support corrupt mafia and their cronies.
@ahmad Needs to lot of homework before commenting here..
If everyone including parliamentarians work according to the constitution, and do not consider themselves above the law. People vote them to run the government and make legislation which can make life of a comment man easy, which is not the case in current situation
Brave judges standing alone against this mighty Sicilian Mafia. Nation will remember you in good words.
@Shaukat Ali Khan Have you read the Constitution?
What is supreme is Truth and Justice. Only two words.
@ahmad agreed - Constitution is made by this August Parliament. Courts can review it, and comment but cannot issue threats that we will deseat an elected person at our whim! This is called arrogance, and not dispensing of justice!
@Habib Canada And we all are standing with and behind our Supreme Court.
The PML-N is fighting to save the Sharif family and its ill-gotten wealth. The Sharif family, in its desperation, is trying to confuse the issue and make it seem a fight between the parliament and the judiciary, which is certainly is not. The parliament has the power to legislate, but the constitution gives the Supreme Court the right and the power to see that the legislation made by them does not infringe on the basic principles and spirit of the Constitution. In fact, the rationale behind this is to ensure a kind of ‘check and balance’ between the three pillars of the state, viz. the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary.
I would also back Parliament, as long as it isn't hijacked for one family.
@Riz - Excellent.
Does killing of innocent be allowed by parliament or looting govt funds be allowed? Can a robber be pardoned by parliament if it suits them?
It can be a wish of some Jokers but can not be allowed. Thank you CJP.
@ahmad Certainly not PML-N. All they want at this time is to change the constitution and bring the prime minister back. People of Pakistan should not let them do it
@Tariq Sindhu Constitution is made by a constitutional assembly which is elected with that particular mandate by people. Regular parliment can amend the constitution but can't change the basic construct of it. If it does so, then supreme court can nullify that .
Being elected doesn’t mean having a license to loot and plunder. That’s what NS wants us to believe.
there must be check and balance. Judiciary has the right to protect laws that are made for any specific person.
Spot on Chief Justice! The constitution sits above the parliament, and its not a matter of just NS or AZ changing it. A constitutional change allowing a convict to lead the country, stupid as it is, still needs at least a 2/3rd vote by parliament, and PMLN knows thats a difficult ask even with their number of cronies.
Constitution is made by the Parliament and the Parliament can change it anytime the people of Pakistan want it changed.
This country is islamic republic of Pakistan basic fundamental are above the parliament constitution and can't be changed how Govt has been doing effort to protect NS since one year instead of making law for improving the life of common man, where they have selected as parlimantarian. keep it up CJP we stand with you saqib Nisar sb.
@Tariq Sindhu So in other words you are implying that the corrupt politicians should be allowed to make changes according to the their vested interests in need, just because they got elected??
It will disastrous for Palriment to amend constitution to save A person.
Good decision media is considered as fourth pillar of democracy. democracy is not just about parliament. judiciary is more important. Parliamentarian should have at least 18 year of eduction from recognized university before applying for coming election or introduce a no one option in ballot so that all people cast their vote.
Who write the Constitution? Second, were you asking questions or making observations and comments?
Interpretation of the constitution is the domain of judiciary. When the parliament is a rubber stamp, the proactive judiciary is the only answer.
@A patriotic national.. there is a lot of ignorance and misinformation about Democracy and Constitution here!. Pakistan is a Republic,in a Republic sovereignty belong to People and Minorities rights are protected against the tyranny of majority by the Constitution. Constitutions are made by Super Majority not just simple Majority. in other words a simple Majority can not make a law that go against the Constitution,if it does the Courts of the country can strike that law as unconstitutional and not valid. even if a Parliament passed a law and Courts find it unconstitutional it can not become a law. Thus Courts have a last word on what is and isn't Constitutional!.
Courts have the authority to overturn the parliamentary decision if it deems it unconstitutional. I think SC is doing a good job.
The national assembly can amend but can not make the constitution. The constitution is made by the constitutional assembly. Moreover, an amendment passed by the parliament is subject to review by the supreme court.
@Tariq Sindhu Sir i do agree what you say is 100% correct. But this is true for the legislators who's dignity and faithfulness to oath is above doubt. When these people are involved in below dignity activities then? It's a big question, where you will fit the ex president? where will ephedrine go? i can put 1001 cases of these people for example who are behaving against their oath. Latest example is the trading of senate seats specially in Baluchistan and Sindh.
What Bills have been passed for the betterment of people in the fields of quick Justice, Education, Water, Health, Jobs and Chinese Investment to protect interest of its own citizens? BIG Zilch!!!
Only thing this Parliament is worried about passing laws to protect loot and plunder of Shareefs. Pathetic.
Only in Pakistan a metric fail thinks that he can analyze better than PhD and a journalist thinks that he can interpret law better than a chief justice of the supreme court.
@Tariq Sindhu If parliament is not bound to follow constitution because they have the power to amend it then get ready for Mob rules. Rights of minorities will be eaten by majorities. Liberals will be killed by Islamists because they will pass a law that it will be legal to kill liberals and no one will be able to challenge it.Its the constitution that saves minorities and allows courts to withdraw amendments to the constitution that suppress the minorities.
@Tariq Sindhu There is a difference between Constitutional Law and other laws which are passed by the Parliament during the normal course of its legislative responsibilities. Every Parliament is bound by the Constitution unless a certain majority of the Parliament Members opt to change the terms enshrined in the Constitution. That's why in 2013 our disqualified PM was asking for a 2/3 majority from the populace hours after voting had ended.
And the final authority to interpret the Constitution is the Supreme Court!
The relationship between the Constitution and the Parliament is a complicated issue. No one can violate the Constitution as it stands at a given point in time. It is the job of the Judiciary to interpret and safeguard the Constitution. The Parliament can amend the Constitution (in a manner laid down by the Constitution itself) but cannot abrogate it or even change its basic features.
My definition of democracy is Government of the people for the people by the people.Do we have a democratic Government?No, not at all.It is Government of the rich by the rich & for the rich. Once in 70 years some one has challenged these rich.Parliamentarians are simply trying to protect their personal interests.
Not sure the honorable CJ his helping his cause or the cause of the superior judiciary by responding to each and every news item. His prompt reaction betrays a deep sense of insecurity.
People who are saying that parliament makes the constitution so they have full right to amend it whenever and however they want. NO, BIG NO. Question is not, who makes constitution. Question is who is supreme. Parliament can't make any law which is against the spirit of basic justice and human rights. If they do. SC has full right to tell people about its legitimacy.
CJP we are with you SIR. Salute
Awesome! When parliament makes laws for party interests then Supreme Court must interfere for justice/constitution. For instance US Court turned down Trumpt immigrant laws.
Parliament creates the constitution and the creator is supreme? Simple isn't it.
Well said & well timed ! Bravo CJP.
Great man and phenomenal leader. Pakistan is only surviving for few brave people like him. CJ ZINDABAD!
Thieves and money launderers are sitting in the Parlament who have no interest in this country.
The fact is that the constitution can be changed by the very parliament which is, as per the CJP, under it. It has happened before and will happen again.
It is beyond comprehension, how can a disqualified prime minister Nawaz Sharif, who is neither "Sadiq" nor "Aameen" re-assume the office of the party president with powers under Article 63A.
Parliament is supreme where governing people are honests.
Well done CJ. Rule of law must be established. All disgraceful people that includes thieves, dacoits, looters, plunderers, land grabbers, sponsors of terrorism should be sent caged in the Attock Fort for life.
@Shaukat Ali Khan: Yes, but only for the betterment of Pakistan and its people. Never to support the criminals.
@Tariq Sindhu ground rules need to be followed and constitution is supreme law of the country it should be respected by the leaders. No one could make changes on fly for their own benefits. Parties leaders should not act like dictators.
What CJ has done is the spirit of the judiciary. However, his version that the Constitution is above the Parliament may be partially right as the Constitution is the product of the Parliament which had the right to amend it when and if required.
Who did creat the Constitution? Who did say Constitution is Supreme? Was that a judge or politician?
this is the reason, when any government or any person wanted to do something betterment for the country, such types of legal and with other mean the hurdles have been created. this practice must be stopped immediately. seventy years have been passed but nothing improved in this regard, very much astonishing. How international image the country has been so for. we are not willing to learn