Government-Judiciary Stand-Off

By Raza, Moosi | Economic Review, September 1997 | Go to article overview

Government-Judiciary Stand-Off


Raza, Moosi, Economic Review


Unwise actions of government have pitched it against the judiciary. Bulldozing of Anti-terrorism Act through the parliament despite visible concern of judiciary and then downsizing of Supreme Court Judges from 17 to 12 have created a confrontation like situation between the two pillars of state. Executive-Judiciary difference intensified when Chief Justice recommended 5 high court judges and Chief Justices for elevation to Supreme Court to fill up the existing vacancies. The government, instead of acceding to the recommendations issued a Notification curtailing the Supreme Court strength by 5. President Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari reportedly clarified his position about the issuance of curtailment of judges notification by stating that he was assured that the summary of the notification had been prepared with the consultation of the Chief Justice.

Supreme Court Bar Association moved a petition against the government Notification and Chief Justice suspended the Presidential Order of curtailment and constituted a three member bench comprising Chief Justice Sajjad All Shah, Justice Saeeduzaman Siddiqui and Justice Ejaz Nisar Shaikh to adjudicate the petition. Later on the government had withdrawn notification, rendering the Bar's petition infructuous. After the withdrawal of judges curtailment notification it was rightly presumed that government did not want confrontation with judiciary and meant business. It was considered a wise step of government that was widely appreciated by all and sundry.

But official signals that are now being received suggest that government appears hell bent to reduce the strength of apex court judges. Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif clearly stated that the judges case would be taken to parliament and which under constitution is the supreme authority to determine the number of judges in accordance with Articles 174 and 192 of the consolidations. According to press reports the two houses of the parliament will be convened soon and government will move a bill for determining the strength of Supreme Court judges. Legal bodies are not taking Prime Minister's statement in good taste. An executive member of Pakistan Bar Council and Chairman Pakistan Bar Council's Human Right Committee is of the view that supremacy of parliament does not mean the subjugation of the judiciary and the independence of judiciary is as much a constitutional requirement as the supremacy of parliament. Similar are the views of Vice Chairman Punjab Bar Council. Legal experts believe that while determining the strength of judges in the Parliament government will have to take into account the quantum of litigation before the apex court.

Statistics available reveal that excluding the Federal Shariat Court, the superior courts have 150,000 cases pending before them. The total sanctioned strength of the superior judiciary is 116, against which 92 judges are working. The Supreme Court is working with 12 judges against its sanctioned strength of 17, the Sindh High Court (SHC) 19 judges against a strength of 28, and the Peshawar High Court (PHC) 12 judges against a strength of 15. Only the Balochistan High Court (BHC) has its full strength of six judges. The report of the Pakistan Law Commission pointed out that 8,031 cases are pending with the Supreme Court, 75,768 with the Lahore Hight Court (LHC), 626,699 with the SHC, 11,497 with the PHC, and 665 with the BHC. It is quite unusual that government on one hand has expanded cabinet members from 7 to around 79 (Ministers 27, Ministers of State 28, and appointees with status of Minister 24) in the name of good governance but on the other intends to downsize judiciary that would surely block the way of speedy justice.

March 20, 1996 verdict of Supreme Court in the case of appointment of judges clearly lays down that a vacancy in the superior judiciary is to be filled with 30 days of Chief Justice's recommendation. But the inexplicable delay on the part of government to implement the recommendation of Chief Justice is violative of the constitution that is being criticized seriously by legal experts. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Government-Judiciary Stand-Off
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.