ISLAMABAD -UNS: A joint session of the parliament on Monday once again passed the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill 2023 amid the opposition’s uproar.
The bill, tabled by federal law minister Azam Nazir Tarar, would be sent to President Dr Arif Alvi again for assent as he had, earlier, returned the bill unsigned to the parliament.
The minister said the opposition showed ignorance over the matter adding that the president left a negative comment on the parliament’s prerogative to legislate. “Mr Alvi should have avoided this,” he added.
Tarar went on to say that the law was enacted to neutralise the effect of the “one man show” adding that all powers were vested in two judges of the SC. “If an amendment has been proposed, it must be taken into consideration,” he added. We wanted transparency, he said, in the judicial system.
He said Senator Mushtaq Ahmad did a fiery speech adding that he opposed the amendments proposed by Mr Ahmad.
PML-N’s Shiza Fatima proposed an amendment to the bill which, upon approval by the parliament, would be followed by a meeting of the judges’ committee. CJP Bandial or any member of the judges’ committee could summon the meeting until regulations were made.
Earlier, President Alvi had returned the bill for reconsideration to parliament, stating that the legislation “prima-facie travels beyond the competence of the Parliament and can be assailed as a colourable legislation”.
The president returned the bill unsigned as per the provisions of the Article 75 of the Constitution days after it was sent to him for approval after it had sailed through the National Assembly and Senate amid standoff between the government and the SC over snap elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
The president said he thought it fit and proper to return the Bill, in accordance with the Constitution, with the request for reconsideration in order to meet the scrutiny about its validity (if assailed in the Court of Law).
The president said several aspects were required for due consideration. Firstly, “Article 191 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court ‘to make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the Court’. Under such enabling provisions of the Constitution, the Supreme Court Rules 1980 have been made and in force duly validated – and adopted by the Constitution itself. These time-tested Rules are being followed ever since the year 1980 – any tinkering with the same may tantamount to interference with the internal working of the Court, its autonomy and independence,” he highlighted.
