PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Wednesday directed the federal government to reply to the questions of law in a writ petition about the appointment of Abdul Hafeez Sheikh as advisor to Prime Minister on Finance.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth and Justice Musarrat Hilali put on notice the federal government through Attorney General of Pakistan in a writ petition challenging the appointment of the advisor. The court fixed May 19 for the next hearing in the case.
The bench issued notice in the writ petition filed by a citizen, Shahid Orakzai, who sought an order of the court to declare the appointment of the advisor to the prime minister against the Constitution and the laid down procedures for discussion on the national budget.
The petitioner prayed before the court to declare that the advisor respondent is not authorised to perform any act as the finance minister of the federal government and take part in the cabinet meeting as such. Abdul Hafeez Sheikh and the government of Pakistan through the Secretary Law, Ministry of Law was made respondents in the petition. The petitioner put two questions of law before the high court. Whether the president can appoint former senator as Advisor under Article 93 of Constitution and whether an advisor under Article 93 can function as the Finance Minister of the federal government.
About facts of the case, the petitioner explained before the bench that the federal government has inducted a former minister and ex-senator as the de-facto minister of finance by employing him as an advisor under Article 93 and the Constitution does not permit that at all under any circumstances.
He explained that although every advisor is empowered by clause (2) of Article 93 to participate in the proceedings of the two houses (parliament), the advisor cannot present the national budget in the National Assembly.
Under the law, he argued that the prime minister of Pakistan cannot direct an advisor to make any financial arrangement with any bank or financial authority outside Pakistan.
“There is no oath prescribed by the Constitution for an advisor in the federation or a province and no minister including the finance minister can perform any act or function until he makes oath under Article 92 (2) of Constitution,” the petitioner argued.
He submitted that the prime minister should know the basic conditions laid down in the Constitution about the functions of the finance minister and questioned, “Can the advisor distribute the net proceeds of the taxes between the federation and the provinces?” under clause (2) (a) of Article 160.
“Can the prime minister nominate Dr Abdul Hafeez Sheikh as a member of the Council of Common Interests and whether the four chief ministers would accept the nomination under Article 153 (2) of Constitution?” the asked the petitioner.
He also pointed out that unlike his past membership of the cabinet, Abdul Hafeez Sheikh is not a member of the Senate at this moment and, therefore, cannot be taken as a federal minister under the Constitution.
Regardless of his credentials, the petitioner submitted that the respondent advisor is not a member of the majority party or its coalition partners and the treasury benches have never trusted his expertise in relation to national spending.
He pointed out before the court that the advisor has to be stopped immediately from performing any function which does not come in the purview of Article 93.
