AGL38.13▼ -0.52 (-0.01%)AIRLINK141.29▼ -1.9 (-0.01%)BOP5.62▲ 0.39 (0.07%)CNERGY3.86▲ 0.12 (0.03%)DCL7.55▼ -0.01 (0.00%)DFML47.4▲ 1.19 (0.03%)DGKC79.66▼ -1.09 (-0.01%)FCCL27.52▲ 0.13 (0.00%)FFBL54.63▼ -0.37 (-0.01%)FFL8.6▲ 0.03 (0.00%)HUBC113.42▲ 1.5 (0.01%)HUMNL11.21▼ -0.32 (-0.03%)KEL3.98▲ 0.21 (0.06%)KOSM8.53▲ 0.22 (0.03%)MLCF35.05▼ -0.29 (-0.01%)NBP63.62▲ 2.41 (0.04%)OGDC169.84▼ -2.3 (-0.01%)PAEL25.18▼ -0.48 (-0.02%)PIBTL5.88▼ -0.08 (-0.01%)PPL126.27▼ -1.85 (-0.01%)PRL24.81▲ 1.24 (0.05%)PTC13.2▲ 1.15 (0.10%)SEARL57.31▲ 0.13 (0.00%)TELE7.16▲ 0.05 (0.01%)TOMCL34.94▲ 0.26 (0.01%)TPLP7.49▲ 0.55 (0.08%)TREET14.33▲ 0.54 (0.04%)TRG46.49▼ -0.47 (-0.01%)UNITY26.06▼ -0.02 (0.00%)WTL1.2▲ 0 (0.00%)

Judicial activism

Share
Tweet
WhatsApp
Share on Linkedin
[tta_listen_btn]

THE latest verdict of the Supreme Court on the issue of reserved seats has again triggered a debate whether or not the judicial activism was in the national interest. There have been instances in the past when decisions of the higher judiciary were resented by the executive terming them as flagrant violation of the concept of trichotomy of power and now the parliament has exercised its own right of legislation to avoid implementation of the SC judgement.

Under the dynamic leadership of Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, the apex court took several initiatives aimed at image correction, setting the record straight and to help promote harmony among pillars of the State. These included a unanimous ruling while disposing of a reference pending since 2011 about the ZA Bhutto case declaring that Bhutto was not given a fair trial; limiting suo moto powers and delegation of power to constitute benches to a committee of three senior judges. However, there are still issues that continue to agitate the minds of the people as some of them were described by legal luminaries as attempts to re-write the Constitution and uncalled for meddling into domain of the executive as a result of which the country faced international litigation and prospects of imposition of heavy penalties. The most striking example is that of the SC intervention in the Reko Diq deal leading to imposition of $5.84 billion penalty on Pakistan by the World Bank’s Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (‘ICSID’). The case is a classic example of missed opportunities as the country escaped the penalty by entering into an out of court settlement in March 2022 with Barrick Gold company for reviving and developing the project. The judiciary also intervened in the LNG project (complicating the gas crisis); the issue of privatization of the Pakistan Steel and Karkay Rental Project. We hope that the apex court would also review these and similar other cases that tarnished the image of the judiciary and exposed the country to international arbitration and penalties.

Related Posts