• last month
Will the full court hear matter of 26th Constitutional Amendment?
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.

Recommended