The Supreme Court on Monday put off the hearing of case relating to real of imagery withdrawal of notification of executive order pertaining to judges' reinstatement indefinitely as government sought to assure the court that "October 15 verdict is implemented in letter and in spirit".
The apex court in it order has ruled that judges' restoration notification cannot be withdrawn by any constitutional organ of the country, including president, prime minister and any such step, if at all taken, would be in violation of Article 6 of Constitution.
Attorney General Molvi Anwar-ul-Haq informed a 17-member bench of the Supreme Court he had communicated apex court's October 15 judgement to about 105 concerned heads.
However, the attorney-general helplessly pleaded before the apex court as usual, saying that no one showed any desire regarding submission of a written statement by the prime minister to the effect that the government had no plan whatsoever to withdraw the notification. "No one has desired to submit the reply," the AG told the court.
The attorney-general told the court that an inquiry committee had been constituted by the government to investigate the matter, which would submit its report on October 22. He said that concerned people of all the three private TV channel - Aaj News, GEO and ARY - had been asked to appear before the committee.
The bench observed that the judiciary believed in rule of law and constitution and would always work according to the constitution. It also directed the committee to correct the inappropriate extraction made in one of the paragraph contained in its preliminary report mentioning a word "a stand-off" between judiciary and executive.
Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday said if a careless person had expressed such things (stand-off) at in a public gathering it was alright, but it should not have come from a responsible forum. "Where is the battle between judiciary and executive?" In July 31 verdict, the judges did not say anything against anybody, even they sent the issues including NRO to parliament to consider them but the parliament threw NRO out and even the provincial governments gave in writing that they would not defend it. He questioned whether it was judges' fault to declare it as non-est.
Comments
Comments are closed.