Supreme Court of Pakistan Disposes of Jamaat-e-Islami’s Petition Against KE Privatization
The Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan’s (JI) appeal against the 2005 privatization of K-Electric (KE) as “ineffective”. During the hearing, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial had remarked that the court would not interfere in economic matters as it lacked the necessary expertise. He advised the petitioner’s lawyer, Rashid Razvi, to approach the concerned high court instead. The parliament made two laws related to clause 3 of Article 184, which state that for the court to have original jurisdiction on an issue, it first needs to be of public importance and must involve a violation of fundamental rights enshrined within the Constitution.
Parliamentary Access for JI
Justice Athar Minallah during the hearing noted that the Pakistan Steel Mill case was heard under the same provisions. He questioned why the court should take up this case against the privatisation of KE and urged the JI to raise the issue in parliament instead. JI’s counsel argued that if parliament failed, then the judiciary remained an option. However, Justice Minallah advised him not to say that the parliament had failed. He urged the JI to uphold the sanctity of the country’s highest forum of debate.
Court’s Observations
CJP Bandial observed that the privatisation was a result of “unresolved public grievances” and said that it was difficult to go into details at this point. “If the SC writes in its orders that it is to stay out of economic matters, then that could have far-reaching consequences,” CJP Bandial stated as he urged the JI to withdraw its application instead and consult the relevant forum. After judicial observations, all the petitioners, including the JI, withdrew their petitions and the court disposed of the petitions.
Ataul Haq Qasmi Case
The Supreme Court has also permitted a petition seeking revision of its decision declaring perks granted to former managing director and chairman of Pakistan Television (PTV) Ataul Haq Qasmi as illegal. The apex court has ordered the revision appeals filed to be numbered. The petitioners were also permitted to change their lawyers under the new laws.
New Law for Review Petitions
The recently passed Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Bill, 2023, ensures fundamental rights to justice by providing for meaningful review of judgments and orders passed by the SC in exercise of its original jurisdiction under Article 184. According to the statement of the objects and reasons of the Act, in case of judgment and orders of the Supreme Court in exercise of its original jurisdiction under Article 184 of the Constitution, the scope of review on both facts and law, shall be the same as an appeal under Article 185 of the Constitution. Previously, the bench that issued the original judgment would hear the review petition as well. However, under the new law, a review petition shall be heard by a bench larger than the bench which passed the original judgment in order.
