The Registrar's Office of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Saturday returned with objections the review petition of the federal government requesting the court to set aside its verdict of December 16, 2009, on the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). Barrister Kamal Azfar had filed the petition on behalf of the federal government, praying the court to set aside its verdict on the NRO in the interest of justice.
The registrar office returned the petition, saying that the petition was time barred and that there was no application filed for the condonation of the petition. Another objection raised on the review petition was that some of the documents filed with the petition were drafted in Swiss language, which were supposed to be filed in a translated version.
The office said the pleas of the review petition are not related to the main case. The petition argued that the NRO enabled the leaders of the main political parties to return to Pakistan and participate in free and fair elections and paved the way for the transition from the military dictatorship to democracy.
This process of reconciliation eventually led to the restoration of democracy, resulting in the release of the detained judiciary and their eventual restoration by the democratic government, the petition said and added that the entire nation, therefore, did derive direct benefit from the NRO in the form of democracy, a military dictator shedding his uniform and a better political atmosphere of tolerance between the government and the opposition parties.
On December 16, 2009, a 17-member bench of the Supreme Court had struck down the NRO, declaring it null and void and against the national interest by noting that NRO was meant to give benefit to a class of people and had violated the Constitution. The petition contended that the Supreme Court committed several dozens of errors in striking down the NRO while offering arguments in support of the legislation.
The federation was condemned unheard on numerous important issues decided upon in the detailed judgement in breach of the time-honoured judicial principle of natural justice ie the opportunity to be heard, the petition said. In addition, the court had directed the government to contact Swiss authorities for revival of mutual legal assistance (MLA) as withdrawal of the cases against President Asif Ali Zardari in Switzerland, ordered by former attorney general Malik Muhammad Qayyum, was illegal, unconstitutional and unauthorised.
The federation filed a review petition on January 16, which was returned by the court after raising some technical objections. Defending the closure of proceedings in the Swiss courts, the federation has questioned the legality of the MLA regarding Swiss cases by saying that the letter dated October 7, 1997, written by the former attorney general, late Chaudhry Muhammad Farooq, triggered false proceedings in the name of so-called mutual legal assistance against former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
The malice of then government is evident from the averments of the letter which itself says that it is written at the behest of Saifur Rehman, the then chairman of the Ehtesab Bureau, it added.
The amended review petition further said that the Supreme Court erred in holding that the NRO was not promulgated for national reconciliation but for achieving the objectives which absolutely had no nexus with national reconciliation because the nation of Pakistan as a whole has not derived any benefit from the same and in describing it as a deal and individual reconciliation, which is factually incorrect.
It said the NRO cannot be regarded as individual or a deal between two individuals as it was legally promulgated by the President under Article 89 of the Constitution having acted upon a summary from the cabinet which indicates that the then government fully supported the NRO.
It further said that this court in its July 31, 2009, judgement gave the legislature four months to pass the NRO into law, that by making this decision this court accepted that the NRO was not non est (never existed) and that it had been legally promulgated by the President under the Constitution.
It was contended that there was no need of a short order or a detailed judgement of the Supreme Court after the NRO was not passed by Parliament. Certain portions of the judgement where references are made to the legislation, it reflects adversely upon the supremacy of the elected parliament of the county, which represents the will of the 170 million people of Pakistan.
"To bring back normalcy into the areas of Swat and Malakand, parliament of Pakistan adopted once again the same approach of national reconciliation when Shariah Regulation was prepared, offered and promulgated by the president of Pakistan, which was duly endorsed by the government of "Pukhtoonkhwa," the petition said. The government prayed that its review petition be accepted and order of December 16, 2009, regarding the NRO be set aside in the interest of justice.