LAHORE - The last week at the Lahore High Court started with a matter of Turkish family’s deportation to their country and ended with a plea seeking disqualification of Punjab Law Minister Rana Sana Ullah over his reported remarks against the judiciary.

A new petition by a local lawyer seeking proper mechanism for appointment of law officers also remained subject of discussions by legal fraternity.

Chief Justice Shah made important remarks that it is voter’s right under the constitution to elect his representative; it’s up to him whether he elects a disqualified person, a defaulter or someone else, the CJ remarked while hearing petitions challenging the Election Reform Act 2017. He directed the petitioners to come up with more arguments on maintainability of the petitions. PAT lawyer Ishtiaq Chaudhary and others had moved the court against Election Reform Act 2017.

Deputy Attorney General Nasar Mirza said that identical petitions were pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, so these petitions should be dismissed for being not-maintainable. The petitioners said that an ineligible person was made head of a political party through this law though he was disqualified by the Supreme Court. It was based on mala fide intention and the Lahore High Court may take up this issue.

On it, the chief justice observed that under Article 17, any person could form a political party. It was neither mentioned in the constitution nor in electoral laws that a disqualified person or defaulter could not head a political party.  The petitioners’ counsel said that morally it was quite bad that a man disqualified by the Supreme Court had been made head of a political party. On this, the chief justice observed that morally it might be bad but the judiciary could not remove anyone for this reason; it decides matters purely under the law.

The petitioners’ lawyers said the court would have to scrutinise the matter otherwise even a terrorist could form a political party. On this, the chief justice remarked that filtration was not court’s job; go and ask the parliament what is right and what is wrong. Courts cannot interfere in such matters, the chief justice said. Justice Shah remarked, “In democracy, right and opinion of a voter is respected and he has the right to vote any candidate even if he is a defaulter or a disqualified person.” “If someone has any objection, he should approach the parliament and such matters should not be brought to the judiciary and the judiciary should not be forced to decide matters on moral grounds,” the CJ said. Giving an example, the CJ said if a woman comes to the court and claims that her husband is corrupt, subjects her to violence and therefore he should be disqualified. How could the court accept this? Judiciary is not the solution to every problem.”

Besides Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution, there were many other election laws in which terms and conditions had clearly been mentioned and if someone has any other complaint against the member of the legislative assemblies then he or she should approach the parliament.

The petitioners’ counsel pleaded the chief justice to give them more time for preparation and said they would argue on the basis of laws and not only moral grounds.

The court accepted their plea and asked them to search the relevant laws being practiced in other countries. The court would resume hearing on Nov 14. The other event that surprised many people was the refusal of Justice Abadur Rehman Lodhi who stopped serving (now former as he was fired by the law secretary) additional advocate general Khawar Ikram Bhatti not to apper in his courtroom. The Law officer had misused his power and had slapped a police officer outside the NAB court in Rawalpindi—the day Maryam Nawaz was appearing before the court. Advocate general Punjab office had assigned duty to AAG Bhatti to represent government in different cases the court of Justice Lodhi. However, after Bhatti’s pictures of slapping police officer became viral, Justice Lodhi restrained law officer from performing his duty in his court. Justice Lodhi through his staff has informed the advocate general officer to bar Bhatti from working in his court, regretting that it is against the dignity of law officer to hit a police officer. Law officers are employees of state not of a political party, the judge had observed.

Justice Lodhi also directed advocate general office to appoint a professional and non-poltical law officer in his court.

This incident led Advocate Ch Shoaib Saleem to move a petition seeking proper legal mechanism for appointment of law officers with Advocate General Office and stopping them from being supporters and workers of political parties. In his petition, he gave the recent example of Khawar Ikram Bhatti who was removed by provincial law secretary Abul Hassan Najami from his post of additional advocate general.  Mr. Saleem has questioned appointment of law officers with Advocate General Punjab Office saying that political interference and lack of proper mechanism has ruined the sanctity of this office which is also a constitutional office.

Appearing before Chief Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, he argued on the subject and convinced the court that the office being a constitutional requirement must be made apolitical. A law officer who appeared on behalf of the provincial government opposed his petition saying that it was the discretion of the Punjab Chief Minister that he may appointment any eligible person as law officer while provincial law department makes laws and sets rules and regulations for these appointments.  However, Chief Justice Shah directed Punjab Advocate General Shakil ur Rehman to come up with arguments on the matter and put off further proceedings until Nov 13.   

 Besides this, Turkish citizens’ matter has turned quite interesting for all those who at least believe in supremacy of law and implementation of court orders. On last hearing, the LHC was told that a special Turkish plane landed in Pakistan and forcibly took  Turkish family  of Mesut Kacmaz, the president of Pak-Turk Schools.

At this, Justice Shams Mahmood Mirza summoned record of Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) regarding arrival of a special plane from Turkey. During the proceedings,  Deputy Attorney General Imran Aziz representing ministries of interior and foreign affairs told the court that the Turkish family in question had not been taken out of Pakistan as per the available record.

Rejecting the government’s claim, Advocate Asma Jahangir told the court the Turkish family had been taken out of Pakistan on a special plane sent by Turkish government. She said the family was deported forcibly and handed over to Turkish police, which entered the soil of Pakistan.

Justice Mirza issued an order to the federal government restraining it from deporting the Turkish teachers mentioned by the counsel under any circumstances without specific order of the court. The judge also ordered the CCPO Lahore to depute police at the residences of the Turkish nationals for their protection. Hearing was adjourned till Oct 25.  During the week, a provincial review board comprising judges of the Lahore High Court approved one-month extension in detention of Jamatud Dawa’s (JuD) chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed while turned down a request of the government for extending detention of four other leaders of the organisation.

 The police presented Saeed and his aides Qazi Kashif Niaz, Prof Zafar Iqbal, Abdul Rehman Abid and Abdullah Ubaid before the board amid strict security arrangements. Senior officials from ministries interior and foreign affairs along with government’s law officers also appeared and assisted the board’s members during in-camera proceedings.  Moreover, Punjab environment protection department told the Lahore High Court on Friday that chief minister had signed “smog policy” and the same will be notified in official gazette in a day. The next hearing is on Nov 8. Advocate Sheraz Zaka had moved the petition. At the end of the week, Majlis Wahdatul Muslimeen’s deputy secretary Abbas Nasir moved an Intra Court Appeal before the LHC seeking disqualification of  Punjab law minister Rana Sana Ullah. The appellant alleges that the law minister gave derogatory remarks against the judge who conducted judicial inquiry into the 2014 Model Town incident. He says the minister by his remarks attempted to malign and scandalize the judiciary.

The appellant pleaded that the law minister also violated his oath by scandalizing state institution, therefore, he be declared ineligible to remain member of the assembly.

 

 

 

 A single bench comprising Justice Shahid Karim had on Oct 5 dismissed the petition of the appellant with an observation that the court could not disqualify anyone on the basis of mere allegations and press clippings.