Will the full court hear matter of 26th Constitutional Amendment?

ARY NEWS

Transcript

00:00They and senior judges have also written in the letter that this matter should be presented in front of the full court.

00:05Do you think that the full court should hear this matter once?

00:09I think that when the implementation of the 26th amendment has been done, then the full court will not listen.

00:16The full bench of the constitutional bench can listen.

00:20Otherwise, the full court does not have this power.

00:23The full 26th amendment has been implemented with its full power and weight.

00:31So if senior judges want to express their desire that it should be kept in the full court, should they not listen?

00:38I don't think so, because at that time the formation of the committee was not complete.

00:45You will remember that when Qazi Faisal Sahib was there, the decision made by two members was condemned by these people.

00:54That two people do not have the power, there should be a three-member committee.

00:58So where were the third judges who participated in that committee and made this decision?

01:04Although they can give their votes, the formation of the committee was not complete.

01:12Therefore, I am very sorry to say that was this committee formally called?

01:22Three members were there, was its agenda prepared?

01:27Were the minutes of the committee officially prepared?

01:35So you are saying that the case cannot go in front of the full court, it should not be heard, it has been implemented.

01:42The full court cannot do anything about it.

01:44This is my personal opinion, I think it is not possible.

01:48I will take the answer from Mr. Usma, because you think it is possible.

01:53So here it is a matter of interpretation of the law, it is a matter of interpretation of the technical process.

01:58Mr. Pasha is very respectful to me, and he has agreed with this.

02:03And his words were that the parliament has stepped in, has crossed the judicial domain.

02:09He then made us count a lot of political history, and he also said the right things.

02:15Free justice is a desire of all of us.

02:18And if the executive gets the power, he follows the justice, then we have also seen the ninth degree.

02:24In the ninth degree, my judge is your judge.

02:27This my judge and your judge, who took out the whip of justice,

02:31and as a result, the case reached the stage that one High Court, Supreme Court, is giving decisions against other courts.

02:38You will remember the entire episode of Sajjad Ali Shah Sahib historically.

02:42And then ultimately he went to the Supreme Court and was attacked.

02:45We have also seen the ninth degree.

02:48We should try, okay you can accuse me that it is an idealistic thought,

02:54but this idealistic thought foresees, lays out our own constitution.

03:00Because of bad judges, we cannot demolish the concept of complete freedom of speech.

03:07Today, if we allow this thing, if we do not stand in front of it,

03:10then freedom of expression will also go from this country, which you sit on the media in this country.

03:15Our other friends who are on the media, we know what the situation is.

03:19What has been the situation in the past.

03:21And if in the future, if someone in front of you,

03:25you call it the support of a drop of ink,

03:29if such an opportunity comes, then freedom of expression will also be taken from you.

03:32The constitutional guarantees will also be taken from you.

03:35Today, the decisions of the courts are not being followed.

03:39We have seen how, to the extent of persecution,

03:42they are our colleagues.

03:44Even though I have a political disagreement with them,

03:47I do not agree with their political thinking.

03:49But what we have done in this country,

03:51we have destroyed the sanctity of the four walls,

03:53we have destroyed our oriental traditions,

03:55then there must be someone standing somewhere.

03:57So it is not a crime to have this desire.

03:59It is not a crime to have this desire.

04:01The way you are upset, I just want to know, Mr. Pasha,

04:04the Vukla community, who have to practice in front of the courts,

04:09are they not worried that if the government gives executive control,

04:15then the matter does not go to the other side,

04:18does not go towards extreme control,

04:20does not become dependent on the judiciary of the executive,

04:24because you are not concerned about this,

04:26are you not worried about this?

04:28Maria, this is a misconception

04:30that it has gone into the control of the executive.

04:32I do not think that in any way

04:35our judiciary has gone into the control of the executive.

04:38Now you see,

04:40before the 18th amendment,

04:42what was the method of determining judges in the Supreme Court?

04:47It was that the governor used to consult with the chief justice of that province,

04:54and then the governor used to send a notification to the President of Pakistan

05:01and the President of Pakistan used to issue a notification.

05:04And the governor certainly used to consult with the Chief Justice of Pakistan.

05:08And those 100% elevations were done by the executive.

05:15So, were there no judges who did not object under the PCO?

05:21Were there no judges who did not object under the LFO?

05:25Were there no judges who gave a dissenting note on the death of Bhutto Shaheed?

05:32Absolutely.

05:34Now you see,

05:36in the formation of the Constitutional bench,

05:40which judge will work under the executive?

05:44Tell me this.

05:45Take any one name.

05:47Sir, I cannot take the names of the judges,

05:49but the tilt of the vote was very clear there, Mr. Pasha.

05:51The tilt of the vote was very clear.

05:53The government had a majority.

05:55We were seeing them in a position worthy of making a bench.

05:58Listen to me.

06:00They have made a bench.

06:02What has happened is that

06:04in the first judicial commission,

06:07four or five people have been added.

06:11There are four parliamentarians,

06:13two from the Treasury Benches

06:15and two from the opposition.

06:20They have become equal.

06:22They have become equal.

06:24One is from the civil society.

06:26Sir, appointed by the government.

06:28That is also your vote.

06:29That is also the vote of the government.

06:31Tell me this.

06:33There are five judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

06:36Five judges.

06:38And the majority is from the judiciary.

06:41The majority is from the judiciary.

06:43There are four from the parliament.

06:47So, in your opinion,

06:49are you satisfied that there is no threat to the freedom of the court?

06:52Are you satisfied with this?

06:54I think that there is no threat to the freedom of the court.

06:56Sir, tell me one thing.

06:58For the sake of argument,

07:00let's take Mr. Saminuddin Khan.

07:02You tell me about him.

07:04In any case,

07:06there can be a disagreement with his opinion.

07:08On his integrity,

07:10if any person thinks that

07:12this is an integrity violation.

07:14Sir, I am talking about the process.

07:16Anyway, it was an interesting debate.

07:18I will have to conclude this segment here.

07:20Mr. Mustafa is very concerned.

07:22He thinks that the court will take over the government completely.

07:25Mr. Pasha is saying that this is not the case at all.

07:27If the parliament makes a little effort to improve the balance,

07:29then they are balancing it out.

Category

Transcript

Recommended