Govt may take back PECA ordinance, IHC told

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has remarked failure to place PEECA Ordinance before parliament proves ill-intent of the Executive.

The miscellaneous applications against PECA Amendment Ordinance came up for hearing before a single bench of IHC, presided over by Chief Justice (CJ) IHC Athar Minallah on Wednesday.

Adil Aziz Qazi from PFUJ, Usman Warraich and others appeared before the court. Qasim Wadood, Additional Attorney General (AAG), represented the government. The AAG told the court that the government has put the ordinance on the back-burner. It is possible the government may take back the ordinance, he added.

The AAG told the court the ordinance may be withdrawn by the government. He said different aspects about promulgation of the ordinance are seen. The powers about promulgation of the ordinance under Article 89 are given up to what extent.

The court inquired from the AAG on what date this ordinance was promulgated. The AAG told the court the ordinance was promulgated on February 18 and was notified in the gazette on February 19. The court remarked failure to place the ordinance before parliament proves ill-intent of the executive.

The AAG told the court there is a timeline for presenting it before the parliament. It has to be placed before the parliament within this timeline. The executive has to adopt them till the rules are there.

The court remarked the government has to present the ordinance in National Assembly and Senate sessions. "It cannot be so that it is presented where there is majority. You have to tell if executive does not discharge its constitutional obligations; it has too its effects. You have to tell this ordinance was placed when and before which house. National Assembly or Senate can reject the ordinance at any time. The constitution makes it binding that an ordinance will be presented before both of the houses of parliament. If ordinance is not presented today in parliament, then as to why the court should not declare it ill-intent of executive."

The court further observed: "Ordinance has to be presented before both houses of parliament. Executive cannot do this that it presents the ordinance before the house wherein it enjoys majority. If Executive has violated its duty, then what will be its consequences? Can the Executive prevent parliament from using its powers for approving or rejecting the ordinance? The Constitution says the ordinance will be presented before both the houses of parliament after it is promulgated. Parliament is supreme. It can reject the ordinance. Executive has no powers to defy the Constitution. If any House of the parliament does not reject the ordinance, then it will be presented as bill. The Executive is keeping deprived the parliament of its right to review the ordinance. If one house of parliament rejects the ordinance, then it will stand abolished. The court cannot put this case on backburner."

The court further remarked such an application is there wherein clauses of PECA act have been challenged. "How can the powers of arrest be given in Section 20? This court has never said one should go for libel. But there is a separate law in this regard. One journalist gave reference of a book which has been published. Did the FIA send notice?"

The AAG told the court Section 20 of PECA ordinance is bailable. The court remarked if it is bailable, then how Mohsin Baig was arrested. The AAG told the court Mohsin Baig was not arrested in this case.

The court remarked the case was framed because they had gone to arrest Mohsin Baig. The AAG told the court there were several other sections in the FIR which were non-bailable.

The court remarked the other clauses which were imposed were not correct. "Was the complaint of the complainant Murad Saeed received in Lahore? If the complaint was received, then through what sources it was received? Was it received through TCS? Is the FIA is meant for only serving the government? Most of the applications on which the FIA took action pertained to public office holder. The FIA took action against journalists and for stifling dissidents' voices. The FIA misused its powers enormously. It is a fact that values of our society have degenerated so much. Should we send all to jail? The political parties are responsible for these values of the society. If anyone does not give true evidence, then prosecutor be allowed to award punishment to anyone. After five years, some other government will come, then FIA will do so too. The government has made Section 20 non-bailable in ordinance. It was made non-bailable so that its more dire consequences could come to fore. Has the definition of natural person been changed? You included the institutions and companies therein too. If someone criticises the PTCL in future, then FIA will take action on it too."

The court adjourned the hearing of the case till April 04.