SC to decide if parliament can change Constitution’s basic structure

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday observed that it would be judged if parliament could make an amendment to the basic structure of the Constitution.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk and comprising Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Mushir Alam resumed the hearing into the petition of the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) filed against the 21st Amendment to the Constitution.
During the course of the hearing, Supreme Court Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk observed that the matter of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution had also been pending before the court for the past four years wherein it was raised that it had affected the basic structure of the Constitution while the present petitions, challenging the 21st Amendment also took the same stance.
The chief justice said that the court also wanted to hear the petition challenging the 18th Constitutional Amendment with the present petitions, challenging the 21st Amendment to the Constitution.
Hamid Khan, the counsel for LHCBA, told the court that the interim order passed by the Supreme Court in 2010 on the petition challenging the 18th Amendment had been implemented under the 19th Constitutional Amendment.
Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk said that full court would be constituted for hearing the present case once the Federation and the three provinces submitted their respective replies.The SC sought till February 24 replies from the federal government and the provinces of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan on the petition and sent notices to the parties with regard to petitions against the 18th Amendment to the Constitution.
The court on January 28, 2015 while hearing the LHCBA petition against the 21st Amendment issued notices to Attorney General for Pakistan and advocate generals of the four provinces for February 12 with the direction to submit their replies.
On Thursday, except for Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KP), the federal government and Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan could not submit their respective replies in the instant matters.Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt and advocate generals of the four provinces appeared before the court. The attorney general sought some time for submitting a concise statement.
Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, however, said that two weeks time had already been given to the Federation and the provinces. The AG replied that they wanted to submit replies in all the petitions collectively as he said that several other petitions had also been filed against the instant matter.
The chief justice, however, observed that the stance of other petitions were the same as raised in the LHCBA petition.In pursuance of the court’s order, Khyber Pukthunkhwa (KP) filed its reply. However, the federal government and Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan sought time in this regard.
It is pertinent to mention here that apart from the petition, filed by the LHCBA, identical petitions had been filed by Pakistan Watan Party leader Barrister Zafrullah Khan, Communist Party Pakistan leaders Engineer Jamil Ahmed Khan, Pakistan Justice Party leader Munsif Malik, the SCBA and SHCBA.
In 2010, around 16 petitioners including SCBA, LHCBA, DBA Rawalpindi, Nadeem Ahmed advocate and Barrister Zafrullah Khan challenged the 18th Amendment to the extent of Article 175-A in the Constitution praying the apex court to declare it ultra vires of the Constitution.
It is pertinent to mention here that after the court constituted a full court for hearing the petition, the role of Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa would be important as they were also part of the 17-member bench that heard the petitions challenging the 18th Constitutional Amendment.