Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday adjourned the hearing in a case pertaining to the extension/reappointment of incumbent Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa. The court is expected to reserve the judgement shortly.
As the hearing commenced today the three member bench directed the attorney general to submit the extension notification issued for former army chief Gen (retd) Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani as well as that of Gen (retd) Raheel Sharif’s retirement in the court.
Justice Khosa asked the AG: “We want to see what pension and perks Gen Kiyani got after his retirement,” and the adjourned the hearing for 15 minutes.
Referring to the retirement of army generals, Justice Khosa said: “If an army general never retires, then under what rule did Raheel Sharif retire?”
After the hearing resumed, the AG submitted the summary of the draft notification for Gen Bajwa's extension prepared by the government yesterday.
Upon examining the summary, the CJP lambasted the attorney general over the mention of the Supreme Court's proceedings in the draft notification.
"Bear your own burden, why do you use our name?" Justice Khosa asked. "Do your own work, why do you drag us in the middle?"
He directed the attorney general to eliminate the mention of the court from the summary, saying: "The court's name has been used so we cannot even point out what's wrong."
He raised questions over the appointment of the army chief, noting that the post was already occupied by Gen Bajwa.
"How can an appointment be made on a position that is already occupied?" the chief justice asked.
It seems like this time a lot of thought has been put into drafting the notification, the chief justice remarked. "Take out the part about the court's advice," Justice Khosa directed the attorney general. "If the president seeks our advice, that is a different matter."
Justice Shah noted once again that the law does not mention that the duration of the tenure is three years.
The chief justice regretted that no one had examined the law while extensions were being granted all these years.
"There is no check on the activities that are going on in cantonment or under which law an action is being taken," he said.
"Now a constitutional institution is examining this matter."
He said that the process of appointment on a constitutional post should be clear.
"The summary neither mentions the army chief's salary nor the perks he is receiving," Justice Shah pointed out. "The attorney general too must have read the laws regarding the army for the first time."
"We were labelled as agents of India and the CIA when we examined the Army Act yesterday," the chief justice regretted. AG Khan told him that India "took a lot of advantage" of yesterday's arguments.
"It is our right to ask questions," the CJP declared.
Justice Shah asked the AG to "suggest how to fix laws regarding the army".
