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

Unsustainable growth
Updated 23 Jun, 2026

Unsustainable growth

CLICHÉS are an essential part of political rhetoric. But when repeated often, they lose their impact. So when...
Banned speeches
23 Jun, 2026

Banned speeches

NATIONAL Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq on Sunday formally lifted long-standing restrictions on the airing of ...
New GB government
23 Jun, 2026

New GB government

WITH the newly elected lawmakers of the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly taking oath on Monday, the PPP looks set to head...
A costly cut
Updated 22 Jun, 2026

A costly cut

Climate risks are increasing and public investment should reflect that reality.
Guarded access
22 Jun, 2026

Guarded access

ONE of the government’s ‘novel’ proposals to snag tax evaders has collided with some harsh realities. On...
Lyari’s passion
22 Jun, 2026

Lyari’s passion

THE love for football in Lyari knows no bounds. The World Cup might be underway thousands of miles away in North...