Leaving aside objections to composition, timing, intention behind Constitutional Court (CC); we need to actually discuss very workability of the idea (which many people naively presume a good idea IF done properly) in our legal context.
Let’s start with few basic questions: 1/n1) What is a constitutional case? Is it:
A) any case where law is sought to be struck down as being unconstitutional?
B) any case where law or its enforcement is sought to be interpreted in consonance with constitutional principles?
C) any writ petition under Art 199 or 2/n
Sep 16, 2024 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
This draft Bill is insane!
In a nutshell, says SC will not listen to any petition involving Fundamental Rights or even appeals from any writ petitions from HCs (whether they are tax cases, rent petitions, regulatory matters etc). All such cases to go to Constitutional Court. 1/n
New Court will initially be headed by a CJ (whether a serving or retd judge or even a lawyer) appointed on PM’s advice. Other judges initially to be appointed by President in consultation with CJ.
No court to act against officials operating under “national security” laws. 2/n
Sep 2, 2024 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Contrary to popular belief, our SC does not have huge pendency issue (relatively speaking)
Yes, 55,000 pending cases sounds high but figure relatively static for many years now. People also don’t realise 12,000 to 18,000 cases get decided every year.
about same or little more than cases filed. So permanently increasing number of SC judges is a pointless waste.
Based on avg. disposal rates, entire backlog can be easily removed in 3-5 yrs by temporarily adding 2 benches of ad-hoc judges & tightening procedure to make [2/4]
May 21, 2024 • 10 tweets • 2 min read
Shocked at Punjab Defamation Act!
While stated aim of law was to sanction fake news; it will severely stifle ALL speech (whether by design or poor drafting/lack of understanding of defamation laws) & will inevitably be abused. It is unconstitutional.
Here’s what’s wrong:
1/10
A) Act creates special tribunal to try civil defamation claims. Tribunal manned by judges appointed by govt (albeit in consultation with CJ) but they lack security of tenure & can be removed by govt at any time (without need to prove misconduct). As per past SC verdicts
2/10
Aug 22, 2023 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
So some of the fun bits in the OSA & Army Act amendment bills.
Previously, s.3 of OSA made espionage of sensitive installations/leaking secret docs etc for purposes prejudicial to safety/interests of the State a criminal offence. Army Act said if such espionage etc was done 1/7
in respect of military establishments; it would incur court martial (even for civilians).
Bright idea in amendments is to remove OSA’s focus on espionage & safety of State and add anything prejudicial to “public order”.
So now, if you’re even “IN THE VICINITY” of a 2/7
May 11, 2023 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
Al Qadir Trust case against IK perfectly captures venality of ALL our ruling elite - politicians, judges, generals, businessmen & media.
So long as anti-corruption laws are used only for political victimisation instead of true accountability - we can never end corruption. (1/n)
Malik Riaz illegally built BTK on encroached land. His partnership with the PPP leadership is documented & his land grab was actively aided by Sindh govt, Malir Development Authority, Sindh police as well as our security agencies. (2/n)
Apr 5, 2023 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
So @Matiullahjan919 makes a point all lawyers should ponder. It’s ok for judges to be strict textualists. It’s ok for them to be purposivists.
But when same bench switches from radical purposivism to strict textualism in space of 3-months; it rightly invites questions. (1/6)
Textualism v purposivism is not a binary. It’s a spectrum. But people must not dance around the spectrum depending on the petitioner in front of them.
So let’s apply the “deeper understandings” & “spirit of the Constitution” logic used by same 3-member bench in 63-A case (2/6)
Jan 23, 2023 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
Thread:
These Shaukat Khanum financial statements are interesting. Thanks for sharing @wasioabbasi. SKMT invests $3m in real estate project in Oman in 2008 & exits investment in 2015 after 7-years only getting original $3m back. Bad investment? Sure. But is it bad faith? (1/n)
What intrigued me was why SKMT invested in Omani real estate in the first place. Charitable endowments are not private equity firms. Their investments are usually (& should be) held in safe govt bonds & bonds/shares of blue-chip Cos & not speculative real estate projects (2/n)
Jul 27, 2022 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
3-member SC bench’s explanation why it doesn’t have to follow own 8-member judgment in 2015 holding “decision of the party as to how to vote has been conferred upon the party head”: 1. Because other judges in 2015 case didn’t refer to this issue so we can ignore 8 who did (1/4) 2. Those 8 judges (including CJP Umar Ata Bandial) were saying something irrelevant to the case. 3. The observations of those 8 judges were made in ignorance of the law (per incurium)
4.They were just “passing remarks” (2/4)
Dec 9, 2020 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Islamabad Bar Association (IBA) has filed petition before SC seeking judicial inquiry into ousted judge Shaukat Siddiqui’s startling disclosures. Siddiqui stated on on oath before Supreme Judicial Council that then CJ of Islamabad High Court had fixed benches as per ISI’s wishes.
Also, that a certain (named) Maj Gen and two Brigadiers of ISI visited him (Siddiqui) at home and in his office to urge him to pass orders against Nawaz Sharif. He was told if he complied, he would become CJ. But after his refusal, SJC started baseless proceedings against him.
2. Those 8 judges (including CJP Umar Ata Bandial) were saying something irrelevant to the case.