DOCSLIB.ORG

Cases and Materials Relating to Corruption Issue 4 – July 2003

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cases and Materials Relating to Corruption Issue 4 – July 2003 Cases and Materials Relating to Corruption Issue 4 – July 2003 Editor John Hatchard A joint project of the Commonwealth Legal Education Association, The Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association, The Commonwealth Secretariat and Transparency International – Centre for Innovation and Research Funded by the United Nations Development Programme Editorial Contact: Transparency International Centre for Innovation and Research 27 the Quadrangle, 49 Atalanta Street, London, SW6 6TU, United Kingdom Tel. +44(0)207 610 1400 Fax. +44(0)207 610 1550 Email: [email protected] Website: www.transparency.org Table of Contents Editorial Review Pages 3 - 4 Constitutional Issues Khan Asfandyar Wali & Others v Federation of Pakistan and Others Pages 5 - 57 Criminal Law Hinchey v R Pages 58 - 101 R v Godden-Smith Pages 102 - 115 R v Natji Pages 116 - 123 Evidence R (on the application of Elliot) v Secretary of State for Home Department Pages 124 - 140 Khan Asfandyar Wali & Others v Federation of Pakistan and Others Pages 141 - 149 Sentancing S v Ngunovandu Pages 150 - 165 Rajendran s/o Kurusamy & ORS v Public Prosecutor Pages 165 - 166 S v Davids Pages 166 - 167 S v Mogotsi Pages 167 - 168 The Queen v Lai Kin-Keung Pages 168 - 169 The Queen v Chan Koon-Kwok Page 169 Attorney General v Carlyle Page 170 2 ISSUE 4: EDITORIAL REVIEW This issue of the Bulletin is divided into four sections covering Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Evidence and Sentencing. Constitutional issues The creation of powerful anti-corruption commissions has already raised significant constitutional issues in a number of Commonwealth countries. See, for example, the case of Gachiengo and Kahura v Republic (Bulletin 1, page 7) where the High Court of Kenya ruled the Kenya Anti-Corruption Authority unconstitutional on the basis that it was contrary to the principle of the separation of powers for the body to be headed by a serving High Court judge. In Wali and Others v Federation of Pakistan (the NAB case), the Supreme Court of Pakistan was faced with a plethora of constitutional petitions attacking the constitutionality of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance. The case raises issues concerning the separation of powers and independence of judiciary, violation of the fundamental rights of freedom of trade, business or profession, security of the person, safeguard from illegal arrest and detention, protection against retrospective punishment, freedom of movement, equality of citizens and other rights guaranteed by the Constitution. It is useful to compare and contrast the approach of the Supreme Court to that of the High Court of Kenya. Criminal Law The cases in this section deal with some key words and phrases commonly found in corruption offences. The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Hinchey contains a particularly useful discussion on the scope of a statutory provision prohibiting a government official or employee from obtaining any “benefit” from a person having dealings with the government. Does this extend to “a government employee who accepts an innocent cup of coffee or occasional lunch from a friend, or receives a lift from someone when caught in the rain”? The issue of whether the word “corruptly” involves an element of “dishonesty” is then examined in the cases of R v Harvey and R v Godden-Smith whilst in R v Natji, the court is concerned with the scope of the term “public body”. Evidence The use of presumptions to “reverse” the burden of proof was considered by the Court of Appeal of Hong Kong in Attorney-General v Hui Kin Hong (see Bulletin 1, page 34). This issue of the Bulletin contains two more significant cases on the issue, namely R (on the application of Elliot) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the NAB case. It is of interest to note that courts in various Commonwealth jurisdictions seem to take a very similar approach to the issue. 3 Sentencing This issue breaks new ground by including a series of cases on sentencing in corruption cases. Whilst they in no way provide a “template” as such, they do serve to alert sentencers of some of the specific issues to consider when dealing with a corruption case. JOHN HATCHARD Editor 4 CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in Pakistan was established by the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance of 1999 with the aim of eradicating “corruption and corrupt practices and hold[ing] accountable all those persons accused of such practices…”. The necessity for establishing the NAB with its wide-ranging powers is justified in the Preamble to the Ordinance as follows: WHEREAS it is expedient and necessary to provide for effective measures for the detection, investigation, prosecution and speedy disposal of eases involving corruption, corrupt practices, misuse/abuse of power, misappropriation of property, kickbacks, commissions and for matters connected and ancillary or incidental thereto; AND WHEREAS there is an emergent need for the recovery of outstanding amounts from those persons who have committed default in the repayment of amounts to Banks, Financial institutions, government and other agencies; AND WHEREAS there is a grave and urgent need for the recovery of state money and other assets from those persons who have misappropriated or removed such assets through corruption, corrupt practices and misuse of power and/or authority; AND WHEREAS there is an increased international awareness that nations should co-operate in combating corruption and seek, obtain or give mutual legal assistance in matters concerning corruption and for matters connected, ancillary or incidental thereto; [New paragraph inserted by a 2001 amendment] AND WHEREAS it is necessary that a National Accountability Bureau be set up so as to achieve the above aims The Ordinance provoked numerous constitutional petitions challenging the vires of the NAB on a wide range of issues, many of deep constitutional significance. In the following case, the Supreme Court of Pakistan took the opportunity of disposing of fifteen of these petitions. The many and varied issues for judicial consideration are set out in paragraph 2 of the judgment. In essence the main issues are as follows: 1. Whether the Federal legislature was competent to promulgate the Ordinance [para 170 et seq] 2. Whether the Ordinance creates a parallel judicial system in contravention of the Constitution of Pakistan [para 183 et seq] 3. The constitutionality of the offence of “wilful default” that is created with retrospective effect [para 198 et seq] 4. Whether the offence of wilful default negates the constitutional right to freedom of trade, business or profession [para 198 et seq] 5 5. The power of the Chairman NAB to freeze property [para 222 et seq] 6. The constitutionality of the "presumption of corruption" [para 224 et seq. This issue is dealt with below at page XXX] 7. Whether the Ordinance provides for the excessive delegation of power regarding the venue for trial [para 233 et seq] 8. The power of the Accountability Court to dispense any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure [para 244 et seq] 9. The constitutionality of the enhanced period of detention for accused persons [para 248 et seq] 10. The constitutionality of the enhanced powers of arrest and discretion as to whether to grant bail enjoyed by the Chairman of the NAB [para 248 et seq] 11. Whether the Act contravenes the concept of the independence of the judiciary [para 265 et seq] 12. The independence and accountability of the NAB [paras 277 et seq] KHAN ASFANDYAR WALI & OTHERS v FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS Supreme Court of Pakistan Mr. Justice Irshad Hasan Khan, C.J. Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri Mr. Justice Muhammad Arif Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Farooq 9-13 and 16 April 2001 Cases referred to in the judgment Abdul Rahim v. Chancellor of West Pakistan University of Engineering and Technology PLD 1964 Lah. 376 Abdul Rashid v. Pakistan PLD 1962 SC 42 Abdul Razak Rathore v The State PLD 1992 Karachi 39 Al-Jehad Trust v. Federation of Pakistan 1996 S.C. 324 Arshad Mirza v. The State PLD 1988 Lahore 640 Badshah Hussain v The State 1991 P Cr.LJ 2299 Bashir v. The State P Cr.LJ 670 Benazir Bhutto v. The State PLD 1999 SC 937 Chenab Cement Product (Pvt) Ltd. and others v. Banking Tribunal, Lahore and others PLD 1996 Lahore 672 Faisal v Federation of Pakistan PLD 2000 Lahore 508 Federation of Pakistan v M. Nawaz Khokhar PLD 2000 SC 26 Federation of Pakistan through the General Manager, N.W. Railway, Lahore v. Syed Gadoon Textile Mills and 814 others v. WAPDA and others 1997 SCMR 641 6 Ghulam Muhammad v The State 1980 P.Cr.L.J. 1039 Government of Baluchistan v. Azizullah Memon PLD 1993 S.C. 341 Government of Sind v. Sharaf Faridi PLD 1994 S.C. 105 Haji Ismail Dossa v Monopoly Control Authority PLD 1984 Karachi 315 Hakim Khan and 3 others versus Government of Pakistan through Secretary Interior and others (PLD 1992 SC 595 Hasham Ali Shah PLD 1954 Lahore 769 Ikramuddin v The State PLD 1958 Kar. 21 Inayat Masih v The State Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1993 Inayat Ullah and others v. M.A.Khan and others PLD 1964 SC 126 Jibendranath Kishore Acharya Chaudhry v. Province of East Pakistan PLD 1957 S.C. [Pak.] 9 Kazi Nizamuddin v The State PLD 1979 Karachi 294 Liaqat Parvez Khan v. Government of the Punjab through Home Secretary PLD 1992 Lahore 517 Malik Asad Ali v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1998 SC 161 Malik Zafar v. The State 1989 MLD 4215 Mehram Ali and others v. Federation and others PLD 1998 SC 1445 Mir Ahmed v. The State PLD 1962 SC 489 Muhammad Anwar v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2000
    Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s ANNUAL REPORT 2000 WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN)’S SECRETARIAT ISLAMABAD – PAKISTAN Tele: (92)-(51)-9201665–8, Fax: 9210487, Telex: 5593 WMS PK E-mail: [email protected] A Profile of the Ombudsman Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, the Senior Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan was administered oath of the Office of Acting Ombudsman of Pakistan by the President of the Islamic Republic of Paki- stan at Aiwan-e-Sadr (President’s House), Islamabad on 10th February, 2000. Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri has rich experience in the legal profession and the judiciary, acquired over a period of about 38 years. His Lordship was born on 1st February, 1937 at Mansehra, NWFP. He received his school education in Lahore, obtaining distinctions and did B.A. (First-Class-First) from Abbottabad in 1960. He obtained his LL.B degree from the University Law College, Peshawar in 1962 and joined the Bar in February, 1963. After qualifying the West Pakistan P.C.S. (Judicial Branch) Exami- nation, he was appointed as Civil Judge on 7th March, 1966. After serving at various stations as Civil Judge and Senior Civil Judge, he was promoted as Additional District and Sessions Judge on 6th July, 1974 and as District and Sessions Judge on 24th October, 1974. His Lordship served as Judicial Commissioner, Northern Areas, from June, 1979 to December, 1982. He remained Special Judge, Customs, Taxation and Anti-smuggling (Central), Peshawar from March, 1983 to September, 1984. He took-over the charge as Joint Secretary, Ministry of Justice and Parliamentary Affairs (Justice Division), Islamabad on iii 12.9.1984.
    [Show full text]
  • PLD 2001 Supreme Court 607
    PLD 2001 Supreme Court 607 Present: Irshad Hasan Khan, CJ. Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, Ch. Muhammad Arif and Qazi Muhammad Farooq, JJ KHAN ASFANDYAR WALI and others---Petitioners versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Cabinet Division, Islamabad and others--- Respondents Constitutional Petitions Nos. 13, 10, 27, 15, 16, 17, 28, 24, 26, O1, 14,19, 20, 32 and 33 of 2000 decided on 24th April, 2001. (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art.184(3)---National Accountability Bureau Ordinance (XVIII of 1999), Preamble--- Constitutional petition under. Art.184(3) of the Constitution before Supreme Court--- Maintainability ---Vires of National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999--- Constitutional petitions were admitted for hearing as questions raised therein ,(detailed below) were matters of first impression and of great public importance involving Fundamental Rights, as ordained by Art.184(3 , of the Constitution and there was another circumstance that Supreme Court had commented upon in the case of S Yed Zafar Ali Shah and others v General Pervez Mussharaf, Chief Executive of Pakistan and others reported as PLB 2000 SC 869 that "the validity of National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999 will be examined separately in appropriate proceedings at appropriate stage." Following are the common points emerging from the Constitutional petitions for consideration of the Court: "(i) Whether the impugned Ordinance creates a parallel judicial system in disregard of the provisions of Articles 175, 202 and 203 of the Constitution and is violative of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mehram Ali and others v. Federation and others (PLD 1998 SC 1445)? (ii) Whether section 2 of the impugned Ordinance whereby it deems to have come into force with effect from 1-1-1985 being retrospective contravenes the Fundamental .Right enshrined in _ Article 12 of the Constitution insofar as it creates a new offence of 'wilful default' with retrospective effect? (iii) Whether section 5(r) of the impugned Ordinance which defines `wilful default' negates the.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2015–2016
    SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN ANNUAL REPORT June 2015 - May 2016 ANNUAL REPORT June 2015 - May 2016 Supreme Court of Pakistan ANNUAL REPORT June 2015 - May 2016 Supreme Court of Pakistan Constitution Avenue, Islamabad Ph: 051-9220581-600 Fa x: 051-9215306 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.supremecourt.gov.pk Branch Registry Lahore Nabha Road. Ph: 042-99212401-4 Fax: 042-99212406 Branch Registry Karachi MR Kiyani Road. Ph: 021-99212306-8 Fax: 021-99212305 Branch Registry Peshawar Khyber Road. Ph: 091-9213601-5 Fax: 091-9213599 Branch Registry Quetta High Court of Balochistan Building Quetta. Ph: 081-9201365 Fax: 081-9202244 Published by: Supreme Court of Pakistan Compiled & edited by: Khawaja Daud Ahmad, Additional Registrar (Administration) Saleem Ahmad, Librarian, Supreme Court of Pakistan ii Supreme Court of Pakistan ANNUAL REPORT June 2015 - May 2016 CONTENTS 1. Foreword by the Chief Justice of Pakistan 1 2. Registrar’s Report 2 3. Profile of the Chief Justice and Judges 5 3.1 Profile of the Chief Justice of Pakistan 6 3.2 Profile of Judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan 7 3.3 Chief Justices & Judges Retired During June 2015 to 34 May 2016 4. Supreme Court of Pakistan 35 4.1 Introduction 36 4.2 Seat of Supreme Court 37 4.3 Branch Registries 37 4.4 Supreme Court Composition, June 2015 to May 2016 39 4.5 Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 40 4.6 Procedure for the Appointment of Judges of the 42 Supreme Court of Pakistan 4.7 Judicial Commission of Pakistan 43 4.8 Composition of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan 45 4.9 Judicial Commission of Pakistan Rules, 2010 45 4.10 Oath of Office 46 4.11 The Supreme Judicial Council of Pakistan 47 4.12 Code of Conduct for Judges of the Supreme Court and 48 the High Courts 4.13 The Supreme Judicial Council Procedure of Inquiry, 50 2005 4.14 Supreme Judicial Council – Reference No.
    [Show full text]
  • Pakistan from 1947………………………………………………… 4
    (1) (2) IN THE NAME OF ALLAH THE MOST BENEFICENT AND MERCIFUL GENERAL KNOWLEDGE BOOK (A self study reference and practice electronic book for learners) M. FREE Books LATEST EDITION Designed and Compiled by: Niamat ullah zaheer S E E O N D E D I T I O N 2018 All Rights Reserved by the Publishers. Not Alowed to sell or print it or again publish. M A N S O O R S U C C E S S S E R I E S (3) P R E F A C E I voluntarily offer my services for designing this strategy of success. ― Mansoor Success Series General Knowledge 2018 ‖ is material evidence of my claim, which I had collected from various resources, since last few months. I have written this book with an aim in my mind. I am sure this book will prove to be an invaluable asset for learners. I have tried my best to include all those topics which important for competitive exams. No book can be claimed as prefect except Holy Quran. So if you find any shortcoming or mistake, you should inform me, according to your suggestions, improvements will be made in next edition. The author would like to thank all readers and who gave me their valuable suggestions for the completion of this book. Please Share This Book This book is free, but can I ask you to help me with one thing? Please post a link of the book on Facebook, Telegram Twitter and What‘s app to share it with your friends and classmates.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2003
    Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2003 THIS PAGE BLANK Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2003 c 2004 National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee This Annual Report is published by the Secretariat of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan. This report can be viewed at the Supreme Court website http://www.scp.com.pk as well as at the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan webste http://www.ljcp.com.pk. Comments and suggestions may be sent to the Secretariat of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, Supreme Court Building, Islamabad. Tel: 051-9220483, 051-9214797 Fax: 051-9214416 email: [email protected]. Contents 1 FOREWORD BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN 1 2 THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 5 2.1 Introduction ........................................ 5 2.1.1 The Supreme Court of Pakistan ......................... 5 2.1.2 Construction of Phase II of Supreme Court Building at Islamabad ...... 6 2.1.3 Registry Building, Peshawar ........................... 6 2.1.4 Automation Plan ................................. 6 2.2 Jurisdiction of the Court ................................. 7 2.2.1 Original Jurisdiction ............................... 7 2.2.2 Appellate Jurisdiction .............................. 7 2.2.3 Advisory Jurisdiction ............................... 8 2.2.4 Review Jurisdiction ................................ 8 2.2.5 Appellate Jurisdiction against Judgements of Federal Shariat Court ..... 8 2.2.6 Power to Transfer Cases ............................. 8 2.2.7 Decision of the Supreme Court binding on other Courts ............ 8 2.2.8 Issue and Execution of Process of the Supreme Court ............. 9 2.2.9 Rule Making Powers ............................... 9 2.3 Role and Functions of the Chief Justice ......................... 9 2.4 Seat of the Court and Branch Registries .......................
    [Show full text]
  • PLD 1999 Supreme Court 504 Present
    P L D 1999 Supreme Court 504 Present: Ajmal Mian, C. J., Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Irshad Hasan Khan, Raja Afrasiab Khan, Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, Nasir Aslam Zahid, Munawar Ahmed Mirza, Mamoon Kazi and Abdur Rehman Khan, JJ Sh. LIAQUAT HUSSAIN and others---Petitioners versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others---Respondents Constitutional Petitions Nos.37, 38, 42 and 43 of 1998 and No.4 of 1999 alongwith Civil Review Petitions Nos.l to 5 of 1999, decided on 22nd February, 1999. (a) Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of the Civil Power) Ordinance (XII of 1998)--- ----S. 6 & Sched.---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Preamble--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 184(3)---Vires of Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of the Civil Power) Ordinance, 1998---Constitutional petition before Supreme Court under Art.184(3) of the Constitution--- -Provisions of Pakistan Armed Forces (Acting in Aid of the Civil Power) Ordinance, 1998, in so far as these allow the establishment of Military Courts for trial of civilians charged with the offences mentioned in S.6 and Schedule to the said Ordinance, are unconstitutional, without lawful authority and of no legal effect---Cases wherein sentences have already been awarded but the same have not yet been executed, shall stand set aside and the cases stand transferred to the AntiTerrorist Courts already in existence or which may be created in terms of guidelines provided by the Supreme Court which may contribute towards the achievement of the objective---Evidence already recorded in such cases and the pending cases shall be read as evidence in the cases, provided that same shall not affect any of the powers of the Presiding Officers of Anti-Terrorist Courts in that regard as is available under the law---Sentences and punishments already awarded and executed in the cases will be treated as past and closed transactions and will not be affected by the decision of the Supreme Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Morning Call November 28, 2013 Pakistan Strategy Equities Smooth Transition (Political, Military, Judicial): Confidence Boosters
    Morning Call November 28, 2013 Pakistan Strategy Equities Smooth transition (Political, Military, Judicial): Confidence boosters Chief of Pakistan Army Timely transition of Chiefs (Army, Judicial) to boost investor confidence Name Tenure After a massively successful, and highly smooth, political transition in the history of Gen. Sir Frank Walter Aug'47 - Feb'48 Gen. Douglas David Feb'48 - Jan'51 Pakistan in May’13, the two top as well as the most influential positions of the Field Marshal Ayub Khan Jan'51 - Oct'58 country’s esteemed institutions i.e. Military (Pakistan Army) and Judiciary (the Gen. Muhammad Musa Oct'58 - Sep'66 Honorable Supreme Court of Pakistan), have been filled up with no further delays, Gen. Yahya Khan Sep'66 - Dec'71 Gen. Gul Hassan Dec'71 - Mar'72 as were initially feared. This series of smooth flow of democratic transitions should Gen. Tikka Khan Mar'72 - Mar'76 not only boost investor confidence in country’s overall leadership, but also help Gen. Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq Mar'76 - Aug'88 rebuild the war-torn image of the country, we believe. Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg Aug'88 - Aug'91 Gen. Asif Nawaz Janjua Aug'91 - Jan'93 Any impacts or changes expected on country’s political canvas ahead? Gen. Abdul Waheed Jan'93 - Jan'96 Though done at the last minute, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's move to appoint Gen. Jehangir Karamat Jan'96 - Oct'98 General Raheel Sharif is largely expected to support country’s democratic forces Gen. Pervez Musharraf Oct'98 - Nov'07 Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani Nov'07 - Nov'13 into politics like his predecessor, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who through his Gen.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2002
    Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2002 THIS PAGE BLANK Supreme Court Annual Report 2002: 4 Supreme Court of Pakistan Annual Report 2002 c 2003 National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee This Annual Report is published by the Secretariat of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan. This report can be viewed at the Supreme Court website http://www.scp.com.pk as well as at the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan webste http://www.ljcp.com.pk. Comments and suggestions may be sent to the Secretariat of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, Supreme Court Building, Islamabad. Supreme Court Annual Report 2002: 6 Contents 1 FOREWORD BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN 1 2 THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN AND ITS ORGANISATION 5 2.1 The Supreme Court as the Court of the Last Resort .................. 5 2.1.1 The Apex Court ................................. 5 2.1.2 The Guardian Court ............................... 5 2.1.3 Final Arbiter of the Law and the Constitution ................. 5 2.1.4 Action in Aid of the Supreme Court ....................... 5 2.1.5 Financial Autonomy ............................... 5 2.2 Jurisdiction of the Court ................................. 6 2.2.1 Original Jurisdiction ............................... 6 2.2.2 Appellate Jurisdiction .............................. 6 2.2.3 Advisory Jurisdiction ............................... 7 2.2.4 Review Jurisdiction ................................ 7 2.2.5 Appellate Jurisdiction against Judgements of Federal Shariat Court ..... 7 2.2.6 Power to Transfer Cases ............................. 7 2.2.7 Decision of the Supreme Court binding on other Courts ............ 7 2.2.8 Issue and Execution of Process of the Supreme Court ............. 7 2.2.9 Rule Making Powers ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • Vol 1 Issue 3 2003
    Cases and Materials Relating to Corruption Issue 3 – May 2003 Editor John Hatchard A joint project of the Commonwealth Legal Education Association, The Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association, The Commonwealth Secretariat and Transparency International – Centre for Innovation and Research Funded by the United Nations Development Programme Editorial Contact: Transparency International Centre for Innovation and Research 27 the Quadrangle, 49 Atalanta Street, London, SW6 6TU, United Kingdom Tel. +44(0)207 610 1400 Fax. +44(0)207 610 1550 Email: [email protected] Website: www.transparency.org Table of Contents Editorial Review The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct Pages 5 -10 Constitutional and Administrative Law Issues Attorney-General v Jones Pages 11 -18 R v Musuota Pages 19 -33 Zardari & Bhutto v The State Pages 34 -61 Dayal v President of the Republic Pages 62 -64 Dayal v Yeung Sik Yuen Pages 65 -73 Criminal Law, Procedure and Evidence R v Attorney General, ex parte Rockall Pages 74 -82 Chan Sze Ting and Lee Chin Ming v Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Pages 83 -87 Restraint of Proceeds of Crime National Director of Public Prosecutions v Mohamed N.O. Pages 88 -111 2 ISSUE 3: EDITORIAL REVIEW Once again, this issue contains cases from a variety of Commonwealth jurisdictions. By way of assistance, prior to each judgment I have included a short comment about the case and, where appropriate, a background note. One general point that is expressly noted in R v Musuota but is implicit in several judgments in this series concerns the need for counsel to be fully appraised of the relevant cases and materials when arguing cases involving allegations of corruption.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Secretariat ————— “Questions
    (112th Session) SENATE SECRETARIAT ————— “QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWERS AND THEIR REPLIES” to be asked at a sitting of the Senate to be held on Friday, the 6th March, 2015 DEFERRED QUESTIONS (Questions Nos. 58, 1, 9, 17, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 167, 154, 156, 158, 159, 161, 162, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 61 Deferred on 4th February, 2015 (110th Session) Question No. @27. (Def.) *Mr. Saeed Ghani: (Notice received on 24-04-2014 at 10:25 a.m.) Will the Minister for Law, Justice and Human Rights be pleased to state the names and dates of retirement of Chief Justices of the Supreme Court of Pakistan who retired since 1985 indicating also the details of pension, allowances and other fringe benefits such as servants, officials accommodation, plots vehicles (with make and model) and utility bills etc. admissible to them under the rules and of those actually provided them? Mr. Pervaiz Rashid: A list of Chief justices of Pakistan retired since 1985 is at Annex- I. The details of Pension, allowances and other fringe benefits admissible to them are at Annex- II. —————————————————————————————— @Deferred form 4th March, 2015 Annexure-I THE NAMES AND DATE OF RETIREMENT OF CHIEF JUSTICES OF PAKISTAN WHO RETIRED SINCE 1985 —————————————————————————————— S. NO. NAME OF CHIEF JUSTICE PERIOD —————————————————————————————— 1. Mr. Justice Muhammad Haleem 25-03-1981 — 31-12-1989 2. Mr. Justice Muhammad Afzal Zullah 01-01-1990 — 18-04-1993 3. Mr. Justice Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Islamia University of Bahawalpur
    COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DOMESTIC POLITICS OF GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ AND GENERAL PERVEZ MUSHARRAF REGIME WITH SPECIAL FOCUS ON POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITIES BY SAEED AHMAD Ph.D. History Session 2009-2012 THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY The Islamia University of Bahawalpur i COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DOMESTIC POLITICS OF GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ AND GENERAL PERVEZ MUSHARRAF REGIME WITH SPECIAL FOCUS ON POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITIES Session (2009-2012) Ph.D. History Scholar Supervisor Saeed Ahmad Professor Dr. Roll No: 01 Muhammad Akbar Malik DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY The Islamia University of Bahawalpur ii iii Dedicated To The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, to all my Teachers and Students, Especially my parents whose prayers are always key to my success and their unconditional love is source of my strength. IV The Islamia University of Bahawalpur DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY Declaration I hereby declare that this thesis entitled; “Comparative Study of Domestic Politics of General Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf Regime with Special Focus on Political and Constitutional Activities” is the result of my individual research and that it has not been submitted concurrently to any other university for any other degree. Saeed Ahmad V The Islamia University of Bahawalpur DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY Forwarding Certificate I hereby recommended that the dissertation prepared under my supervision by Saeed Ahmad entitled; “Comparative Study of Domestic Politics of General Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf Regime with Special focus on Political and Constitutional
    [Show full text]