ISLAMABAD: In a gathering, which was not attended by their colleagues from other parts of the country, lawyers of the federal capital rejected the proposed constitutional amendments and vowed to resist them.

The convention, organised by the Islamabad Bar Council, Isl­am­abad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) and Islamabad Bar Association on Monday, was already disowned by the Pakistan Bar Council — the apex regulatory forum of lawyers.

Last week, the three lawyers’ bodies of Islamabad decided to host the convention with the expectation that bar associations from across the country would attend it.

However, the event turned out to be a damp squib as representatives of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Lahore High Court Bar Association, Peshawar High Court Bar Association, and Sindh Bar were not in attendance.

PBC, provincial bar associations stay away from Islamabad lawyers’ convention

Even senior PTI lawyers from Islamabad, Shoaib Shaheen and Niazullah Khan Niazi, did not attend the convention despite their being on the same page as protesting lawyers on the issue of constitutional amendments.

The event was attended by senior lawyer Hamid Khan, Baloch­istan Bar Association president and local chapters of Lahore and Peshawar high court bar associations.

A large number of young lawyers were also in attendance.

The convention adopted a resolution against the proposed constitutional amendment and also vowed to resist anyone supporting the Federal Constitutional Court, changes in the appointment criteria of judges and rotation of high court judges from one province to another — all reportedly part of the ‘constitutional package’.

‘Premature’ timing

Talking to Dawn, IHCBA Presi­dent Riasat Ali Azad said senior lawyers from other provinces couldn’t attend the event due to “transport issues”.

He claimed that lawyers were united for the rule of law and independence of judiciary.

However, some of his colleagues believed the convention by Islamabad lawyers was “premature”.

Former IHCBA secretary Mohammad Waqas Malik said that parliament is empowered to do legislation and lawyers “could not dictate lawmakers” on this matter.

Another lawyer, Rana Abid Nazir, said lawyers could file a petition against any law before a high court or the Supreme Court. However, in this case, the amendments are being criticised even before their tabling in parliament.

Last week, the IBC vice chairman, Qazi Adil Aziz, criticised the Supreme Court’s ruling on Article 63-A of the Constitution.

The decision came at a time when the ruling coalition was “making all-out efforts” to pass constitutional amendments to set up a Federal Constitutional Court and modify the process of appointment, posting, and transfer of superior courts’ judges, Mr Aziz had said.

Published in Dawn, October 8th, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

Geopolitical games
Updated 18 Dec, 2024

Geopolitical games

While Assad may be gone — and not many are mourning the end of his brutal rule — Syria’s future does not look promising.
Polio’s toll
18 Dec, 2024

Polio’s toll

MONDAY’s attacks on polio workers in Karak and Bannu that martyred Constable Irfanullah and wounded two ...
Development expenditure
18 Dec, 2024

Development expenditure

PAKISTAN’S infrastructure development woes are wide and deep. The country must annually spend at least 10pc of its...
Risky slope
Updated 17 Dec, 2024

Risky slope

Inflation likely to see an upward trajectory once high base effect tapers off.
Digital ID bill
Updated 17 Dec, 2024

Digital ID bill

Without privacy safeguards, a centralised digital ID system could be misused for surveillance.
Dangerous revisionism
Updated 17 Dec, 2024

Dangerous revisionism

When hatemongers call for digging up every mosque to see what lies beneath, there is a darker agenda driving matters.