ISLAMABAD, April 8: The federal government on Friday informed the Supreme Court that it could not direct legislators to amend the constitution, under any circumstances.

“If the Supreme Court takes up the role of striking down, revising or re-writing the constitution, it would virtually mean taking away powers of the two-thirds majority of parliament and entrusting it on a single bench of this court,” Attorney-General Makhdoom Ali Khan said.

“Will it be a safer thing to do for the interest of the country?” the attorney-general asked, while arguing before a five-member bench which is hearing petitions challenging the 17th amendment and the dual office of President Gen Pervez Musharraf.

The AG stressed that the masses had vested the power to amend the constitution with the elected representatives and it was where the power must remain.

Referring to the petitions, he said it seemed the petitioners did not like the constitution and they wanted to rewrite it, despite the fact that no precedence was available where the apex court had issued directions to lawmakers to amend the constitution.

He said that Pakistan had come a long way since the 2002 general elections and the passage of the 17th amendment, adding that the period of constitutional deviation which began on October 12, 1999, had come to an end. He said the people of Pakistan were the political sovereign of the country and they had spoken through their elected representatives.

About the Pakistan Lawyers’ Forum petition, he said the petitioner had based his submissions by referring to the events of October 12, 1999 but had failed to take note of factual and jurisprudential developments since.

The events of October 12, the AG said, had been conclusively validated by a 12-member Supreme Court bench in the Zafar Ali Shah case and, therefore, could not be re-examined by the bench.

Similarly, he said, the assumption of the office of president by General Musharraf and the referendum order had been upheld by the Supreme Court in the Qazi Hussain Ahmed case. About the Legal Framework Order, he said, the court had observed in the Watan Party case that the proper forum for examining constitutional amendments was parliament. Therefore, he maintained, the points raised in the petitions were a closed chapter, not to be reopened.

“What is then left for us to decide?” Justice Javed Iqbal asked.

“There is nothing left to be decided,” the AG replied.

The attorney-general said the October 10, 2002, general elections were in consonance with the judgment in the Zafar Ali Shah case and had established the supremacy of the apex court.