ISLAMABAD: The Sup­reme Court on Thursday dismissed a petition challenging the proposed 26th constitutional amendment after former president of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) withdrew his petition that had sought to restrain the government from tabling the amendment bill before parliament.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, a three-judge bench, which was seized with the petition as well as an appeal against the Registrar office’s decision to return the petition, dismissed the petition as withdrawn when senior counsel Hamid Khan appeared on behalf of petitioner Abid Shahid Zuberi to inform the court that his client had instructed him to withdraw the petitions.

The CJP questioned whether Hamid Khan had been specifically engaged for the withdrawal for Mr Zuberi himself could have taken the petition back.

Mr Zuberi had expressed ap­p­rehensions that constitutional amendments, if passed by parliament, may trample the concept of separation of powers, independence of judiciary and its powers to enforce fundamental rights. He requested the court to declare these powers sacrosanct and beyond the jurisdiction of parliament to withdraw, interfere or tamper with.

Former SCBA president had sought to prevent govt from tabling amendment bill before parliament

But the office of Assistant Registrar Civil returned the petition, saying he had been directed by the Registrar to return the petition being not entertainable since it was filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution to challenge a document which has not yet attained the status of law and was merely a ‘proposed law’ not yet introduced in parliament.

Moreover, it is the MNAs and senators, who may pass a bill when presented before parliament, but the petition has not arrayed them as parties.

The one-page letter also stated that under the Constitution the power to make laws vests in the legislature and the same cannot be curtailed before a law was made, adding that hypothetical questions were posed in the petition.

Besides, the petitioners mentioned that they were advocates and members of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) whereas the Legal Practitioners and Bar Cou­ncils Act stipulates that lawyers should not become party to any matter.

If the petitioners have a grievance and want to be portrayed as members of PBC, the letter pointed out, they should first approach their respective bodies, i.e., the SCBA and PBC for authorising them to represent these bodies.

Meanwhile, the petition contended that the proposed bill would transfer the powers of the Supreme Court and high courts to the executive and annihilate the principles of independence of judiciary and separation of powers.

The petition had also regretted that the propo­sed bill, carrying 40 ame­ndments to the Consti­tution, was shrouded in secrecy, indicating sheer mala fide on behalf of parliament.

Published in Dawn, October 18th, 2024