The Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance has been challenged in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, with a plea seeking its declaration as unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, the Sindh High Court has reserved its judgment on a similar petition challenging the Practice and Procedure Amendment Act after hearing arguments. Justice Yusuf Ali Saeed remarked that the judgment will be delivered today.
Choudhary Ihtesham ul Haq Advocate filed the petition in the Supreme Court against the Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance. The petition names the Secretary of the Law Ministry, Secretary of the Establishment Division, and Secretary of the Cabinet as respondents.
The petitioner requested the court to declare the ordinance unconstitutional and nullify all actions taken under it. The petition also seeks a suspension of the ordinance until a final decision is made.
Read more:
Justice Shah leaves without attending SC Practice and Procedure Committee meeting: sources
Justice Munib excluded from committee after amendment to SC practice law
Govt prepares to introduce SC Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance
The petition argues that the Supreme Court has previously ruled that ordinances can only be issued in emergency situations. The petitioner claims that the ordinance violates the rights of the people, citing Article 9 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to access an independent judiciary, and Article 10A, which guarantees the right to a fair trial.
The petition further states that the ordinance grants additional powers, which undermines the powers of Parliament and impacts the independence of the judiciary. It claims that the ordinance will negatively affect the Supreme Court’s decisions.
Meanwhile, in the Sindh High Court, the Practice and Procedure Amendment Act has also been challenged. After hearing arguments, the court reserved its judgment. Justice Yusuf Ali Saeed remarked that the judgment will be delivered today.
Ibrahim Saifuddin, Advocate, argued that the Practice and Procedure Amendment Act was not presented to the assembly and that the amendment is a direct attack on the judiciary.
