Justice Umar Ata Bandial said the federal and provincial governments need to take steps for increasing revenue generation by expanding the tax base, and empowering statutory and public institutions to effectively perform their role under the Constitution and the law.

He stated, while addressing the full court reference held on Tuesday on the eve of Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed’s retirement, who laid down his robes on attaining the age of superannuation. Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Javed Khan, Pakistan Bar Council vice chairman Hafeezur Rehman Chaudhry, and president Supreme Court Bar Association Ahsan Bhoon also spoke on the occasion.

“Pakistan suffers from a mushrooming population which in turn has left it vulnerable to social and economic pressures that are typically faced by similarly situated countries. These include poor health and education facilities, low productivity, unskilled labour, unemployment and therefore poverty,” he said.

To tackle the myriad problems facing Pakistan, all concerned stakeholders need to come together to address the alarming rate of population growth, he added.

Justice Bandial said other steps to be taken by the federal and provincial governments to overcome the challenges facing Pakistan include creating state-of-the-art vocational training institutes to impart skills-based learning to the youth, increasing revenue generation by expanding the tax base, and empowering statutory and public institutions to effectively perform their role under the Constitution and the law.

These matters concern the essence of fundamental rights of the bulk of our population. Therefore, the Court would be keen to engender initiatives in these areas whenever its backing is required.

In the backdrop of criticism of judges after the announcement of Supreme Court on Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s petition, he said; “All of us have deep respect and regard for each other. The differences in our opinions in matters of law arise from our individual perceptions.”

“This diversity brings richness to our understanding. That is how yesterday’s minority view may become tomorrow’s majority judgment. But we are surprised that some observers who discharge a noble duty as watchful media, particularly members of the social media, take it upon themselves to scandalise judges rather than focusing on the criticism of their judgments.”

He stated that such conduct is unprofessional and uncivilised quite apart from being unconstitutional.

Please understand that something has to be done about it. We will have to ask the Bar to help before we act in the matter.

The outgoing Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed in his address thanked the judges and lawyers for extending support. “I am really indebted and grateful to my brother judges for their valuable support, sharing of experience and enlightenment in dealing with the affairs and administration of the Court.”

AGP Khalid said the Supreme Court with Bar is the true custodian of the Constitution of which federalism, independence of judiciary and parliamentary form of government are essential features. He said; “There can be no independence without accountability and accountability without independence.”

The attorney general referring the events of November 2007 said that neither the perpetrator nor the victims had imagined that this constitutional subversion would not only be reversed but the perpetrator would be in the dock and on the run. He said this happened because there many people of sterling character both on the bench and the bar who refused to surrender to raw force.

He said Article 184(3) of the Constitution was meant to be inquisitorial jurisdiction. Such exercise only looks to the class of victims whose fundamental rights were being violated and provide relief without any adverse findings against any other person. Yet along the way this power morphed into adversarial jurisdiction, which led this Court to areas not amenable to the judicial resolution.

The SCBA president and the PBC vice chairman demanded that the amendment should be made in the Supreme Court Rules for providing appeals in the cases decided under Article 184(3) of constitution.

They said that the petition against the permanent disqualification under Article 62(1(f) should be heard by a larger bench.

This report was first published in Business Recorder on Feb 2, 2022.