ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly, on Wednesday, unanimously passed a resolution to constitute a parliamentary committee on judicial reforms to especially empower the Parliament to “not allow any other institution to transgress and encroach on its powers.”

The resolution was moved by Federal Minister for Law and Justice Senator Azam Nazeer Tarar in the house for passage. The house unanimously passed the resolution.

According to the resolution, “this august House believes that the Parliament is the supreme legislative body of the State of Pakistan, whereby the enactment of the laws including amendments in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is the sole prerogative of the Parliament.

Whereas the Constitution envisages a trichotomy of powers amongst three organs of the State, namely the legislature, executive and the judiciary, it is the Legislature which has been assigned the task of law-making, the executive to execute such laws under the doctrine of separation of powers, the judiciary to interpret the laws; under the Doctrine of Separation of power, none of the organs of the State can encroach upon the powers of the others; And whereas the Constitution of Pakistan has entrusted this parliament with certain constitutional mandates including the power to confirm the appointment of judges of the Superior Courts in terms of Article 175 A of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973; And where, the parliament being the representative of the will of the people of Pakistan, shall not allow any other institution to transgress and encroach on its powers.“

Earlier, Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, while speaking on the floor of the National Assembly, urged the speaker to constitute a parliamentary committee on judicial reforms which should comprise the treasury as well as opposition members of both houses of the parliament.

He said, “Supreme Court means not only the chief justice of Pakistan. Only three judges should not change the Constitution with one stroke of a pen. We are struggling for a democratic Pakistan and to empower the parliament.

Just as the judiciary had decided that the prime minister would need the approval of the cabinet, in the same way, the Supreme Court of Pakistan is not just the chief justice of Pakistan, it is each and every member of the Supreme Court.“

The PPP chairman said, “The time has come for the formation of a joint parliamentary committee, with the Senate and the National Assembly of Pakistan, including the representatives of the government and the opposition to legislate and decide how many judges should sit and decide.

Before the chief minister Punjab seat, it was the speaker and the deputy speaker’s seats that were concerned. The PPP is ready for judicial reforms; this is the unfinished agenda of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto’s “Charter of Democracy”.“

The PPP chairman said that the Supreme Court of Pakistan made a decision day before yesterday (Tuesday) as it was faced with an important constitutional, administrative and political issue, which was of the deputy speaker’s ruling and the post of the chief minister Punjab. “All the political parties had one demand, and that was the formation of a full court bench.

IHC launches Justice Reforms Project

We did not name any X or Ys as an attempt to pressurise any institution. We did not threaten to divide Pakistan. When one institution was deciding regarding another, our only request was for the full court bench to be present, we would accept any decision made then.

This demand of ours was not only for the CM Punjab election. When the previous government abrogated the Constitution and tried to sabotage the no-confidence, my request to the Supreme Court was the same. It was a constitutional issue; the whole Parliament is at stake along with the future of democracy. When such issues are dealt with, a full bench needs to be made. It was not made then, and not made a day before yesterday.“

He said, “we take pride in the fact that we restored the 1973 constitution in the Assembly of 2008-2013 and also filtered the black laws that were the remnants of a dictator and made the 18th Amendment. To make and restore the constitution, we have to produce a two-thirds majority of the House. One member of this House attains millions of votes.

It takes two-thirds of the members to change one comma in the constitution.“ The PPP chairman said, “a nexus was then made to look for ways to have the country regress again and run a controlled democracy. When the 58 (2b) is no more, a new 58 (2b) is with the court. When we were struggling to curb terrorism in 2008-2013, address the economic and democratic crises, the mandate of the people, democracy and this Parliament was attacked daily.”

He said that we continued to implement the Charter of Democracy (CoD), signed by Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. “What is left of the CoD till date is judicial reforms, that we had promised. Those judicial reforms revolve around the formation of constitutional courts that were to decide regarding the constitution and the appointment of judges, which would not be in the hands of a judge but of the House. We made an amendment in which the House along with judicial representatives would collectively appoint judges. The House, the PM, and the law minister of the time were then threatened to pass the 19th Amendment or the 18th Amendment would be abolished.”

“I accept, on the floor of the House that getting intimidated by the threat was our mistake. We should have never passed the 19th Amendment. We should have told the court of that time to go home if it did not accept the constitution of Pakistan.”

“A PM with a two-thirds majority was then sent home, he could not even be his party’s president. His senators were forcefully made to stand as independents. At the time of the general elections of 2018, the role played by certain judges was apparent. They were participating in a campaign. This House should see, be it the 2018 or by-elections, what apolitical individuals were doing.

At the time of the 2018 elections, then Chief Justice Saqib Nisar was running a campaign against us, he would make a speech against us in Larkana, slap a judge, give a lecture in Karachi. When the re-polling of our candidate, Faisal Saleh Hayat who had won, was taking place, Nisar went to his opponent. This is a controversial role.“

“We then saw the role of our institutions from 2018 till April. It is in the record that our institutions were playing a controversial role for a selected rule. Be it our establishment or judiciary, they should play a constitutional role. Their role should not be controversial. This was the reason that we had advised for a full court bench to be formed.

It does not matter to me whether Hamza Shehbaz is made the CM of Punjab or Pervaiz Elahi, but it cannot be the case that there are two Pakistans or two constitutions instead of one. It cannot be the case that the Supreme Court orders for the disqualification of members on the party head’s directions but later changes its perspective and favours the parliamentary party leader.“

Bilawal said that it is the responsibility of the House to defend the role of the parliament. He said that our duty is to make the constitution and theirs is to interpret it. He said that it is not their duty to amend the constitution. He said that the journey of Pakistan as a democratic country would be incomplete as long as this remains unaddressed and judicial reforms are not made and the judiciary is not empowered.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022