Objective Resolution fuelled sectarianism: SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan onWednesday took up petitions against the 18th and 21st Constitutional Amendments.

The 17-judge full court headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk resumed hearing of the case. During proceedings, Justice Qazi Faiz Essa observed that the Objective Resolution was not part of the Constitution but inclusion of the resolution in the constitution by a military dictator sparked sectarianismin the country. The judge remarked that Article 227 stated that all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the injunctions of Islamas laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.

“The explanation states that in the application of this clause to the personal law of any Muslim sect, the expression “Quran and Sunnah” means the Quran and Sunnah as interpreted by that particular sect,” Justice Qazi Essa said. He remarked that this explanation was added in 1985 and if the government wanted to abolish sectarianism, it would have to go back to the original Constitution.

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, while referring to Article 2-A of the Constitution, remarked that if they accepted the features, which were given by the Objective Resolution, it might lead to the destruction of the other provisions of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, federation counsel Khalid Anwar told the bench that the 1973 Constitution was a political document and lawyers had only drafted it, therefore, they could not get supremacy over the politicians who founded the country.

Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan questioned how the parliament could suspend people’s fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. He said the basic structure was permanent and fixed.

Advocate Khalid Anwar said the judiciary could not be superior and no one could annul the Constitution. Justice Faiz Essa remarked that sectarianism spread across the country after the inclusion of the Objective Resolution in the Constitution.

Khalid Anwar said sectarianism was not an issue before 1985.
Justice Essa said whether they wanted Islamfree of sectarianism or not. Justice Jawwad S Khawaja inquired what should be the base of the Constitution if the parliament replaced democracy with monarchy through legislation.

K halid Anwar said the Constitution could only be based on democracy.

The apex court ordered Khalid Anwar to continue arguments and adjourned the hearing till Thursday (today).—APP