Ads Top

Reference Against Judges: 'It's dangerous if the president's role is a rubber stump'

Justice Omar Ata Bandial, the head of the 10-member bench of the Supreme Court, who heard petitions filed to block the proceedings of the Supreme Judicial Council on the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faiz Isa, remarked that the role of the president in sending references against the judges. If you have a rubber stump then this is a very dangerous thing.

During the hearing of these petitions on Monday, the chief of the bench responded to the remarks made by Rizarbani, a lawyer of the Sindh High Court Bar Association.

The petitioner's lawyer said that the role of the president in the constitution was written impartially but that the president was a part of the present government.

Also read

Reza Rabbani said that the presidential reference sent to the Supreme Judicial Council against Justice Qazi Faiz Isa and Sindh High Court Judge K Agha was in fact equivalent to stopping the power of the independent judiciary.

He said that the President has the power to send the matter back to the Prime Minister if he is aware that there is any doubt in the complaint sent by the Government against any judge. This was not the case.

Raza Rabbani, who is also the chairman of the upper house of Pakistan's Senate, argued that Article 175A of the Constitution deals with the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court while Article 209 of the Constitution deals with the removal of judges. So under that article, the term of the judges is also fixed because if the matter of the judges remains in the air, then the requirements of justice cannot be fulfilled.

He said that the government had no authority to investigate and investigate the two judges of the Supreme Court, first the FBR and then the FIA ​​and then the military intelligence agency ISI. The assignment.

Justice Omar Ata Bandial, the chief of the bench, inquired if these properties were not mentioned in the annual plots but after they were recognized and the Supreme Judicial Council took over the matter after the presidential reference was filed. Should the applicant issue a notice to the judges, he should not seek an answer.

The lawyer of the Sindh High Court Bar Association said that it would have been better for the Supreme Judicial Council to hire FBR to assist in this matter.

He said that under the Pakistan Constitution of 1956, if a judge of a higher judiciary were to be removed from his office, the matter would have been brought to Parliament and if two-thirds majority in the Parliament would have decided in his favor. Only then would this judge be removed from his office.

He said that the Constitution of 1962 constituted the Supreme Judicial Council for proceedings against the judges of the high judiciary, which, if any complaint against any judge was sent to the head of the council, the Chief Justice, he would be sent to other judges. The matter would have been forwarded to the Chief Justice after reviewing the complaint, after which the Supreme Judicial Council issued notices to the affected judge.

Rizarbani said that while sending a reference against these high court judges, the President did not express his opinion but rather played a post office that summarized by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Law. Sent to.

He said that more than 80% of cases in the High Courts are being dealt with regarding abuse of executive powers or their decisions.

In the Bench, Justice Mansour Ali Shah raised the question that under the constitution, the President has immunity in many cases, on which the counsel for the petitioner stated that the immunity obtained by the President is not unlimited but limited which is mentioned in the Constitution. Was.

No comments:

Powered by Blogger.