Federal, KP govts seek dismissal of pleas challenging 25th Amendment

Published April 13, 2021
The federal and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governments on Monday questioned the maintainability of a set of petitions challenging the 25th Constitution Amendment. — Photo courtesy SC website/File
The federal and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governments on Monday questioned the maintainability of a set of petitions challenging the 25th Constitution Amendment. — Photo courtesy SC website/File

ISLAMABAD: The federal and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governments on Monday questioned the maintainability of a set of petitions challenging the 25th Constitution Amendment under which Fata was merged into KP on May 31, 2018.

As a three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial took up the petitions, Additional Attorney General Sohail Mahmood raised objections saying the petitions could not be filed under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution and, therefore, these should be dismissed forthwith.

The petitions were moved by a number of Maliks of former Fata, mainly by Malik Anwarullah Khan, through their counsel Wasim Sajjad. Senior counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmed, also representing a number of Maliks, sought time to furnish a reply to the objections raised by the government.

The main grievance of the petitioners was that the people of Fata were deeply dissatisfied and aggrieved by the act of merger pursuant to the 25th Constitution Amendment on the grounds that the Fata people, on the basis of an undertaking given by Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, had voluntary agreed to become part of Pakistan and that they were not consulted before introducing the amendment nor any jirga or referendum was held as mandated under Article 247 (6) of the Constitution.

But the federal government argued that by employing any cannon of interpretation or enlarging the scope of the fundamental rights and interpreting it even in a liberal manner, the consultation, referendum or jirgas could not be brought within the meaning of fundamental rights as envisaged in Chapter 1 Part II of the Constitution.

It is an admitted preposition of law that in order to maintain a petition in the original jurisdiction of the SC both the conditions as envisaged in Article 184(3) must co-exist, including the question of public importance with reference to enforcement of the fundamental rights.

Published in Dawn, April 13th, 2021

Opinion

Editorial

Missing links
Updated 27 Apr, 2024

Missing links

As the past decades have shown, the country has not been made more secure by ‘disappearing’ people suspected of wrongdoing.
Freedom to report?
27 Apr, 2024

Freedom to report?

AN accountability court has barred former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife from criticising the establishment...
After Bismah
27 Apr, 2024

After Bismah

BISMAH Maroof’s contribution to Pakistan cricket extends beyond the field. The 32-year old, Pakistan’s...
Business concerns
Updated 26 Apr, 2024

Business concerns

There is no doubt that these issues are impeding a positive business clime, which is required to boost private investment and economic growth.
Musical chairs
26 Apr, 2024

Musical chairs

THE petitioners are quite helpless. Yet again, they are being expected to wait while the bench supposed to hear...
Global arms race
26 Apr, 2024

Global arms race

THE figure is staggering. According to the annual report of Sweden-based think tank Stockholm International Peace...