Monthly Case Law Update
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
IN the SUPREME COURT of PAKISTAN (Original Jurisdiction)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, CJ Mr. Justice Mushir Alam Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed Suo Moto Case No. 01 of 2020 (SUO MOTO ACTION REGARDING COMBATING THE PANDEMIC OF CORONA VIRUS (COVID -19) IN ATTENDANCE: For the Federation : Mr. Khalid Javed Khan, Attorney General for Pakistan Mr. Sohail Mehmood, DAG Dr. Tanveer Qureshi, Secretary M/o National Health Asif Suhail, Director (Lit) (All from M/o National Health) Syed Mansoor H. Gardezi, Dir. Legal Advisor, Pakistan Bait-ul-Mal. Lt. Gen. Muhammad Afzal, Chairman, NDMA. For ICT : Mr. Niaz Ullah Khan Niazi, A.G., Islamabad Azhar Hussain Shah, DSP Legal. For Govt. of Punjab : Mr. Shan Gul, Acting A.G., Punjab Cap (R) M. Usman, Secy. Primary & Secondary Health Deptt. Punjab. (both via video link from Lahore) Ch. Faisal Fareed, Addl. A.G. Punjab M. Nabeel Ahmed Awan, Secy. Specialized, Health Care & Medical Education Deptt. Saifullah Gondal, Dy. Secretary, Zakat & Usher. Muhammad Aslam Ramay, Administrator Zakat & Usher. Alamgir Ahmed Khan, (all via video link from Lahore) For Govt. of Sindh : Mr. Salman Talibudin, A.G, Sindh Muhammad Usman Chachar, Addl. Chief Secy. Home. Dr. Saeed Ahmed Qureshi, (Focal Person to Chief Secy. Sindh) Zahid Abbasi, Secy. Health Suo Moto Case No.01 of 2020 2 Qazi Shahid Pervez, SMBR Iftikhar Shalwani, Commissioner Kci. Haroon Ahmed Khan Addl. Chief Secretary, Zakat & Ushr (All via Video link from Karachi Branch) For Govt. of KPK : Mr. Shumail Butt, A.G. KP Mr. -
Pakistan Was Suspended by President General Musharaff in March Last Year Leading to a Worldwide Uproar Against This Act
A Coup against Judicial Independence . Special issue of the CJEI Report (February, 2008) ustice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, the twentieth Chief Justice of Pakistan was suspended by President General Musharaff in March last year leading to a worldwide uproar against this act. However, by a landmark order J handed down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Justice Chaudhry was reinstated. We at the CJEI were delighted and hoped that this would put an end to the ugly confrontation between the judiciary and the executive. However our happiness was short lived. On November 3, 2007, President General Musharaff suspended the constitution and declared a state of emergency. Soon the Pakistan army entered the Supreme Court premises removing Justice Chaudhry and other judges. The Constitution was also suspended and was replaced with a “Provisional Constitutional Order” enabling the Executive to sack Chief Justice Chaudhry, and other judges who refused to swear allegiance to this extraconstitutional order. Ever since then, the judiciary in Pakistan has been plunged into turmoil and Justice Chaudhry along with dozens of other Justices has been held incommunicado in their homes. Any onslaught on judicial independence is a matter of grave concern to all more so to the legal and judicial fraternity in countries that are wedded to the rule of law. In the absence of an independent judiciary, human rights and constitutional guarantees become meaningless; the situation capable of jeopardising even the long term developmental goals of a country. As observed by Viscount Bryce, “If the lamp of justice goes out in darkness, how great is the darkness.” This is really true of Pakistan which is presently going through testing times. -
Punjab Judicial Academy Law Journal
Punjab Judicial Academy Law Journal June, 2020 Copyright © 2020 by PUNJAB JUDICIAL ACADEMY 2 Punjab Judicial Academy Law Journal (PJALJ) Published by: The Punjab Judicial Academy 15-Fane Road, Lahore Tel: +92-42-99214055-58 Email: [email protected] www.pja.gov.pk 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Editorial Team of this first volume of the Punjab Judicial Academy Law Journal wish to thank Professor Dr. Dil Muhammad Malik, former Principal and Dean Faculty of Law, Punjab University Law College, Lahore, Dr. Khursheed Iqbal, AD&SJ, Mardan, Dr. Muhammad Ahmad Munir Mughal, In-charge Publications/Deputy Editor, Islamic Studies, IIU, Islamabad and Dr. Shahbaz Ahmad Cheema, Assistant Professor, Punjab University Law College, Lahore for their assistance in the publication of the this Journal. 4 EDITORIAL TEAM Patron-in-Chief: Honourable Mr. Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan, Chief Justice, Lahore High Court, Lahore / Chairperson, Board of Management, Punjab Judicial Academy Patrons: Honourable Mr. Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi, Member, Board of Management, Punjab Judicial Academy Honourable Mr. Justice Shehram Sarwar Ch., Member, Board of Management, Punjab Judicial Academy. Editor-in-Chief: Mr. Habibullah Amir, Director General, Punjab Judicial Academy Editor: Mr. Muhammad Azam, Director (Research & Publications), Punjab Judicial Academy Member Editorial Board: Syed Nasir Ali Shah 5 C O N T E N T S (1) A REVIEW OF THE BOOK “FAMILY LAWS IN PAKISTAN, BY MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR ABBASI AND SHAHBAZ AHMAD CHEEMA, KARACHI: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS,2018” 7 Justice (R) Dr. Munir Ahmad Mughal (2) CLASSIFICATION OF PRISONERS INTO ORDINARY, BETTER, AND POLITICAL CLASS IN THE PRISONS ON ACCOUNT OF SOCIAL STATUS: A DENIAL OF LAW OF EQUALITY 17 Dr. -
The Call for Pakistan's Executive Task Force for Religious Tolerance
BYU Law Review Volume 2020 Issue 1 Article 8 Fall 9-30-2020 With an Even Hand: The Call for Pakistan’s Executive Task Force for Religious Tolerance J. Clifford Wallace Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation J. Clifford Wallace, With an Even Hand: The Call for Pakistan’s Executive Task Force for Religious Tolerance, 2020 BYU L. Rev. 69 (2020). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2020/iss1/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Brigham Young University Law Review at BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Law Review by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 004.W ALLACE_FIN.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 9/25/20 11:53 AM With an Even Hand: The Call for Pakistan’s Executive Task Force for Religious Tolerance Hon. J. Clifford Wallace* There are times when the right person is in the right position to cause a dramatic change in the course of the history of a country and its people’s rights. I believe, and others may also, one of those times was June 19, 2014. It was on this day that former Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani of Pakistan filed his authored opinion on behalf of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, blazing a new trail in his country’s decades’ long struggle dealing with minority religious rights. It may seem odd that this has been such a problem in Pakistan. -
Expeditious Dispute Resolution Mechanism Within Formal Judicial System of Pakistan
1 Expeditious Dispute Resolution Mechanism within Formal Judicial System of Pakistan Paper presented at: National Judicial Conference 27th to 29th April, 2018, Supreme Court of Pakistan Islamabad. by Mr. Zia Ur-Rehman (Additional District and Sessions Judge) Sr. Director Administration Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Judicial Academy. Peshawar. e-mail: [email protected] WORKING PAPER: Not for citation or distribution without permission of the author. Abstract This paper provides the first comprehensive insight on Expeditious dispute resolution mechanism within Formal Judicial System of Pakistan, which is an important aspect of the current ever-expanding debate on the issue of delay and legal efficacy. Delay in justice system is a chronic phenomenon that is inherent in almost every judicial system, but the situation in Pakistan is particularly alarming. Delay is one of the major concerns that force people to settle their disputes out of the courts through other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Another reason could be related to the complexity of procedure. People in general are afraid of mishandling 2 cases by police, exploitation of lawyers and the complex court procedures. Litigation, therefore, is never the first choice of parties in Pakistan. They tend to opt for other informal dispute resolution mechanisms, such as jirga or panchayet. Despite their inadequacy in most of the legal matters. I would like to add from the Pakistani perspective that we have raised legions of individuals who are not attuned to their rights and would rather cave and settle over fighting it out in court. And this is one of the reasons why ADR has been introduced in many legal systems around the globe including Pakistan. -
Federal Judicial Academy Bulletin
FEDERAL JUDICIAL ACADEMY BULLETIN January - March, 2014 Mr. Parvaiz Ali Chawla, Director General, Federal Judicial Academy presenting souvenir to Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar , Judge , Supreme Court of Pakistan Contents Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mushir Alam reiterates importance 01 of judicial training DG, FJA asks members of district judiciary to achieve 02 excellence in administration of justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali asks 04 Superintendents of District and Sessions Courts to institutionalize their practical knowledge Superintendents of District and Sessions Courts 06 advised to work with honesty, devotion and diligence Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar Improvement is always required to enhance 08 capacities: Hon'ble Chief Justice, Islamabad High Court Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar urges judges, 09 lawyers to attain command on law Rule of law creates order, harmony in society 10 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amir Hani Muslim asks young 12 judges about effective time management Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry asks 13 Editorial Board Family Court Judges to save estranged families from break up Patron-in-Chief Family Court Judges asked for speedy settlement of 15 family disputes: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Riaz Ahmad Khan Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani Enrich knowledge of law, interpret, apply and 16 implement it with highest degree of accuracy Chief Justice of Pakistan/Chairman BoG Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dost Muhammad Khan Editor-in-Chief Judges can play their role to reform 18 society: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan Parvaiz Ali Chawla Director General Hon'ble Mr. -
(Advisory Jurisdiction) PRESENT: Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, CJ Mr
SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Advisory Jurisdiction) PRESENT: Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmed, CJ Mr. Justice Mushir Alam Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2020 [Reference by the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, under Article 186 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973] For the Federation : Mr. Khalid Jawed Khan, [in Reference No.1/2020] Attorney General for Pakistan [in CMA.127-128, 170, Mr. Sohail Mehmood, Addl. Attorney General 989,1293/2021] for Pakistan Mr. Ayaz Shaukat, DAG [Assisted by Ms. Maryum Rasheed, Advocate] For the National Assembly : Mr. Abdul Latif Yousafzai, Sr. ASC [in CMA.278/2021] Mr. Muhammad Mushtaq, Addl. Secretary (Legislation) Mr. Muhammad Waqar, DPO (Lit.) For the Senate of Pakistan : Senator Muhammad Ali Khan Saif [in CMA.296/2021] Mr. Muhammad Javed Iqbal, DD For the Election Commission : Mr. Sikandar Sultan Raja, Chief Election [in CMA.210, 808, 880, 983, Commissioner 1010/2021] Mr. Justice (R) Muhammad Iltaf Ibrahim Qureshi, Member (Punjab) Mrs. Justice (R) Irshad Qaiser, Member (KP) Mr. Shah Mehmood Jatoi, Member (Balochistan) Mr. Nisar Ahmed Durrani, Member (Sindh) Mr. Sajeel Shehryar Swati, ASC Mr. Sana Ullah Zahid, ASC, L.A. Dr. Akhtar Nazir, Secretary Mr. Muhammad Arshad, DG (Law) For Government of Punjab : Mr. Ahmed Awais, AG [in CMA.95/2021] Barrister Qasim Ali Chohan, Addl.AG Ms. Imrana Baloch, AOR For Government of Sindh : Mr. Salman Talib ud Din, AG [in CMA.386/2021] Mr. Sibtain Mahmud, Addl.AG (via video link from Karachi) For Government of KP : Mr. -
Defining Shariʿa the Politics of Islamic Judicial Review by Shoaib
Defining Shariʿa The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review By Shoaib A. Ghias A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Malcolm M. Feeley, Chair Professor Martin M. Shapiro Professor Asad Q. Ahmed Summer 2015 Defining Shariʿa The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review © 2015 By Shoaib A. Ghias Abstract Defining Shariʿa: The Politics of Islamic Judicial Review by Shoaib A. Ghias Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy University of California, Berkeley Professor Malcolm M. Feeley, Chair Since the Islamic resurgence of the 1970s, many Muslim postcolonial countries have established and empowered constitutional courts to declare laws conflicting with shariʿa as unconstitutional. The central question explored in this dissertation is whether and to what extent constitutional doctrine developed in shariʿa review is contingent on the ruling regime or represents lasting trends in interpretations of shariʿa. Using the case of Pakistan, this dissertation contends that the long-term discursive trends in shariʿa are determined in the religio-political space and only reflected in state law through the interaction of shariʿa politics, regime politics, and judicial politics. The research is based on materials gathered during fieldwork in Pakistan and datasets of Federal Shariat Court and Supreme Court cases and judges. In particular, the dissertation offers a political-institutional framework to study shariʿa review in a British postcolonial court system through exploring the role of professional and scholar judges, the discretion of the chief justice, the system of judicial appointments and tenure, and the political structure of appeal that combine to make courts agents of the political regime. -
Annual Report 2011
2012-14 ANNUAL REPORT Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, Supreme Court Building, Constitution Avenue, Islamabad THE ANNUAL REPORTS ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE COMMISSION’S WEBSITE. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE COMMISSION’S SECRETARIAT AT THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS: LAW AND JUSTICE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN SUPREME COURT BUILDING CONSTITUTION AVENUE ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN TEL: 092-51-9208752 FAX: 092-51-9214797 092-51-9214416 EMAIL: [email protected] WEBSITE: www.ljcp.gov.pk TABLE OF CONTENTS S. # CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER Foreword Introduction 1. Profiles of Chairmen and Members of Law and Justice Commission 6 of Pakistan 1.1 Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, 6 Chief Justice of Pakistan 1.2 Mr. Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, 9 Chief Justice of Pakistan 1.3 Mr. Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk 17 Chief Justice of Pakistan 1.4 Mr. Justice Agha Rafiq Ahmed Khan 18 Chief Justice, Federal Shariat Court 1.5 Mr. Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza 20 Chief Justice, Federal Shariat Court 1.6 Mr. Justice Sh. Azmat Saeed 21 Chief Justice, Lahore High Court 1.7 Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 22 Chief Justice, High Court of Sindh 1.8 Mr. Justice Dost Muhammad Khan 23 Chief Justice, Peshawar High Court 1.9 Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 24 Chief Justice, Lahore High Court 1.10 Mr. Justice Qazi Faez Isa 25 Chief Justice, High Court of Balochistan 1.11 Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar, 26 Chief Justice, High Court of Sindh 1.12 Mr. Justice Mian Fasih-ul-Mulk 27 Chief Justice, Peshawar High Court 1.13 Mr. Justice Muhammad Anwar Khan Kasi 28 Chief Justice, Islamabad High Court 1.14 Mr. -
IN the SUPREME COURT of PAKISTAN (Original Jurisdiction)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN (Original Jurisdiction). PRESENT: Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, CJ. Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal Mr. Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan Mr. Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday Mr. Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan Mr. Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani Mr. Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk Mr. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed Mr. Justice Ch. Ijaz Ahmed Mr. Justice Ghulam Rabbani Mr. Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany Mr. Justice Muhammad Sair Ali Mr. Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui Mr. Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja. CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. 09 OF 2009 Sindh High Court Bar Association through its Secretary. ….PETITIONER CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. 08 OF 2009 Nadeem Ahmed Advocate ….PETITIONER VERSUS Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and others. ….RESPONDENTS For the petitioner: Mr. Hamid Khan, Sr. ASC. (Const.P.09/2009) Mr. Rashid A. Razvi, ASC. Mr. M. S. Khattak, AOR Assisted by M/s Waqar Rana, Waheed Khalid Khan & Haq Nawaz Talpur, Advocates. For the petitioner: Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, Sr. ASC. (Const.P.08/2009) Assisted by Barristers Ms Natalya Kamal & Syed Shehryar, Advocates 2 For respondent No.1 Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa Attorney General for Pakistan. Agha Tariq Mehmood Khan, DAG Mr. Shah Khawar, DAG. Ch. Akhtar Ali, AOR. For respondent No.2. Mr. Muhammad Yousaf Leghari, A.G.Sindh. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, AOR. For respondent Nos.3 & 4. Nemo. Respondent No.5. Not represented. Dates of hearing: 20th to 24th and 27th to 31st July, 2009. JUDGEMENT IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ.- The above Constitutional Petitions bearing Nos. 9 of 2009 and 8 of 2009 involve common questions of facts and law and are disposed of by this single judgment. -
525 111 Dissenting Opinion of Judge Ad Hoc Jillani
525 DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC JILLANI India’s Application is inadmissible because its conduct amounts to an abuse of rights — The 2008 Agreement between India and Pakistan governs specifically questions of consular access and assistance in cases of arrest and detention on national security grounds — Pakistan lawfully withheld consular access and assistance while examining the case of Mr. Jadhav on its merits — Even if the Vienna Convention is applicable in the present case, Pakistan has committed no breach of Article 36 thereof — Pakistan has already in place the procedures necessary for ensuring the effective review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence of Mr. Jadhav. 1. Much to my regret and with greatest respect, I could not endorse several parts of the Judgment and some fundamental points. First, I con- sider that the Court should have found India’s Application to be inadmis- sible in light of its conduct in the present case, which amounts to an abuse of rights. In my view, India’s reliance on the Vienna Convention on Con- sular Relations (hereinafter “Vienna Convention” or “VCCR”) in the present case is misplaced and subverts the very object and purpose of that instrument. Second, the Court has misconstrued and rendered meaning- less Article 73, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention, which does not preclude States parties from entering into subsequent bilateral agree- ments. Notwithstanding that, the Court has ignored the legal effect of the 2008 Agreement on Consular Access between India and Pakistan (herein- after “2008 Agreement”) and specifically its point (vi). In my view, by concluding the 2008 Agreement, the Parties (India and Pakistan) aimed to clarify the application of certain provisions of the Vienna Convention to the extent of their bilateral relations, namely by recognizing that each contracting State may consider on the merits whether to allow access and consular assistance to nationals of the other contracting State arrested or detained on “political or security grounds”. -
Monthly Case Law Update
MONTHLY CASE LAW UPDATE Vol.2, No.4 June & July, 2014 ________________________________________________________________ CONSTITUTION Contents Page 1) Province of Sindh etc. vs. M.Q.M. Etc. (PLD 2014 S.C. 531) Constitution 01 Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, C.J., Khilji Arif Hussain and Sh. Azmat Saeed, JJ. Civil Laws 02 Interpretation of statutes "Reading in" or "reading down" of a statute Criminal Laws 03 At the time of "reading down" of a statute two principles had to be kept in view; first that the object of 'reading down' was Companies Ordinance 04 primarily to save the statute and in doing so the paramount question would be whether in the event of reading down, could the statute remain functional; second, would the Family Laws 04 legislature have enacted the law, if that issue had been brought to its notice which was being agitated before the Inheritance 04 court. Fundamental Rights Land Acquisition Act 05 'Positive' and 'negative' rights---Distinction Human rights law made a distinction between positive and negative rights, wherein positive rights usually obliged action Notifications 05 and negative rights usually obliged inaction. Positive rights placed a positive duty on the State and included social and Pre-Emption Act 05 economic rights. Negative rights placed a duty on the State not to interfere in certain areas where individuals had rights. Holder of a negative right was entitled to non-interference, Rent Laws 06 while the holder of a positive right was entitled to provision of some good or service. Right holder could thereby exercise Service Laws 06 his right to act a certain way or not to act a certain way and could exercise his or her freedom of choice within the existing right Constitution of Pakistan It is the spirit not the form of law Art.