ISLAMABAD – The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday directed to give final arguments in a petition filed to declare the nine ordinances illegal, unconstitutional being ultra vires of Article 89 of the Constitution.
A single bench of comprising IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah conducted hearing of the petition moved by PML-N MNA Mohsin Ranjha, through Advocate Umer Gilani, requesting the IHC to declare the impugned ordinances illegal, unconstitutional being ultra vires of Article 89 of the Constitution and having been promulgated in a mala fide manner.
The court also directed Makhdoom Ali Khan, Babar Awan, Raza Rabbani and Abid Hussain Minto who were appointed as amici curiae to submit their replies to assist the court in this matter. Later, the IHC bench deferred hearing in this matter till March 12 for further proceeding. Previously, the Federal Ministry of Law stated in its reply that Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) promulgated 170 presidential ordinances during their regimes.
The written reply stated that the President of Pakistan was authorised to introduce necessary legislation through an Ordinance in accordance of the Constitution. It further said that the PML-N and the PPP, who were claimants of Parliament’s supremacy, had introduced a total of 170 ordinances during their governments’ tenures from 2008 to 2018.
The ministry also produced the details of all ordinances before the court. President Dr Arif Alvi promulgated on October, 30, 2019, eight ordinances, including Letter of Administration and Succession Certificates Ordinance, 2019; Enforcement of Women’s Property Rights Ordinance, 2019; Benami Transactions (Prohibition) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019; Superior Courts (Court Dress and Mode of Address) Order (Repeal) Ordinance, 2019; National Accountability (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019; Legal Aid and Justice Authority Ordinance, 2019; Whistle-Blowers Act. The President on December, 27, 2019, promulgated another Ordinance i.e. NAB (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2019.
In his application, Ranjha said that more than one and a half month later, respondents have yet to file any reply. In the meanwhile, they have continued to promulgate new ordinances with full speed, while completely sidelining Parliament.
He added that the question of law raised in the petition goes to the essence of the democratic dispensation envisaged in the Constitution 1973.
Let SJC determine whether properties belong to Justice Faez Isa, contends AGP
Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Anwar Mansoor Khan on Tuesday contended before the Supreme Court of Pakistan that let the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) determine whether properties belong to or financed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa and whether this comes under misconduct or not?
The AGP made this contention before a 10-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial which heard identical petitions challenging presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez for allegedly not disclosing his foreign properties in wealth statements.
Besides the judge of the top court of the country, Pakistan Bar Council, Supreme Court Bar Association, Bar Councils Association of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan and Abid Hassan Minto, and I A Rehman have also challenged the Presidential Reference against Justice Isa.
Khan argued that judges require greater level of honesty, intellect and law abiding. The constitution makers wanted that the judges’ matter instead of bringing in the public be decided by the peer judges, while the executive is kept apart from it. He informed that Justice Qazi in his petition wrote that “I am not bound by the ‘mistake’ made by my spouse.
He submitted that first property was purchased in 2004 and title renewed in 2011 in the name of Zarina Montserrat Khoso Carrera and the daughter. The two other properties were purchased in 2013 in the name of spouse along with Sehr Isa Khoso, daughter and Arsalan Isa, son. He told that Zarina Montserrat Khoso Carrera name was not registered in Pakistan.
Article source: https://nation.com.pk/19-Feb-2020/ihc-directs-to-give-final-arguments-in-plea-seeking-declaration-of-9-ordinances-illegal