The National Assembly of Pakistan has passed a bill known as the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023, which aims to curb the powers of the chief justice of Pakistan in taking suo motu notice. The bill proposes that a three-member committee consisting of senior judges will have the power to take suo motu notice instead of the chief justice alone. This committee will also ensure transparent proceedings in the apex court and give the right to appeal.
However, President Dr Arif Alvi has refused to give his assent to the bill twice, stating that the matter is sub judice before the apex court. The Supreme Court has also barred the government from implementing the bill, citing interference with and intrusion into the independence of the judiciary.
Suo motu notice refers to the power of the chief justice of Pakistan to take notice of a matter on their own accord, without the need for a formal complaint or petition. This power has been a subject of debate in Pakistan for several years, with some arguing that it gives too much power to the chief justice and can be misused.
The passage of this bill has been controversial, with some arguing that it is an attempt to curtail the independence of the judiciary and weaken the power of the chief justice. Others argue that it is a necessary step to ensure transparency and accountability in the apex court.
Overall, this is a significant development in the ongoing debate over the powers of the chief justice of Pakistan and the role of the judiciary in the country. It remains to be seen how this issue will be resolved, and what impact it will have on the future of Pakistan's judiciary.
Insights of Article
1. The National Assembly in Pakistan has converted the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill 2023 into an act.
2. The President has refused to sign it into law, and the Supreme Court has ordered that it should not be implemented.
3. The bill aims to limit the suo motu powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
4. The bill proposes to establish a three-member committee that will have the power to take suo motu notice, instead of the Chief Justice alone.
5. The Supreme Court has termed the bill as an interference in the independence of the judiciary.
6. The power of suo motu notice has been a crucial tool for the court to ensure that justice is served in cases where the fundamental rights of the citizens are violated.
7. The bill seeks to take away this power from the Chief Justice and give it to a committee, which many believe will compromise the independence and integrity of the judiciary.
8. The Supreme Court's objection to the bill aims to protect the independence of the judiciary and maintain its role as the ultimate arbiter of justice in the country.
9. The conversion of the bill into an act despite opposition from the President and the Supreme Court is a concerning development.
10. This highlights the need for a robust and independent judiciary to safeguard the rule of law and protect the fundamental rights of the citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment