Chief Justice Lahore High Court while proceeding with a contempt of court petition against President Asif Zardari here on Wednesday observed that the Constitution prohibited initiation of criminal proceedings against the President and asked the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP), Irfan Qadir to come up with arguments on the issue of immunity on Thursday (today).
The LHC, however, witnessed the delivery of some harsh remarks by Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) on many judgements handed down by superior courts and the judicious restraint exercised by judges of a full bench hearing a contempt petition against President of Pakistan. AGP Qadir, who appeared before the bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, advanced his arguments against the maintainability of the petition.
The AGP told the bench that the federation's counsel Wasim Sajjad could not appear due to his engagement before Supreme Court. Qadir insisted to argue on the issue of maintainability of the petition while the CJ asked him to tell the bench whether contempt of court proceedings could be initiated against President in presence of Article 248 (2) of the Constitution. The AGP said he could not discuss the constitutional immunity unless the maintainability of the instant petition was decided by the bench first.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah remarked that interpretation of article 248 (2) was necessary to decide the maintainability of the petition. AGP, however, continued to advance his arguments against the maintainability of the petition. He said President took oath of his office under Constitution not under any judgement passed by the court. He said the President could not be forced to do anything for which he was not obligated to do under the Constitution.
Criticising the SC judgement in Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani case, the AGP claimed that the government accepted the verdict to avoid a clash between institutions. The principal law officer of the federation said holding of the dual office was a political matter and the court should avoid to deliver judgements on such matters. The Chief Justice, however, interrupted the AGP and reminded him that he was not supposed to criticise court's judgements in such a belligerent manner. The CJ asked the AGP, "If you know the Constitution, you must know you cannot discuss a judgement before the author judge."
"You do not have the liberty to discuss other judgements here and we are not here to face personal attacks, the CJ added. He asked the AGP to go back to his seat if he did not have any legal argument to make on the issue. The law officer, however, resumed his arguments and said political questions should not be brought to courts as it led to confrontation between institutions.
. The AGP added that the May 12, 2011 judgement of the LHC was not practicable. He said the court in its judgement of May 12 had not issued any binding order but expressed its expectation. Opposing the judgement, he further said it was an outcome of one-sided legal assistance. Qadir stated that the court could only interpret Constitution but could not rewrite it. The Chief Justice observed that the court had not issued any direct order keeping in view the grace and respect of the office of the President.
At this point, the AGP told the CJ, "The office of the President is highly respectable but your remarks shows that you are considering yourself superior to President." Justice Bandial politely told him that the court had very much regard of the President's office, therefore, it had used the word 'grace'. Earlier, Advocates Azhar Siddique and A K Dogar also advanced their brief arguments on behalf of the petitioner. On court's instructions, Azhar Siddique tried to establish that the role of the President was only ceremonial. Dogar argued that there was no need to hear arguments on immunity as the case had reached a stage of framing charges on the contemnor.
Comments
Comments are closed.