• Ali Zafar says current draft allows govt to install judges of its choosing
• Dar claims follow-up amendments to CrPC in the pipeline
• ANP’s Aimal Wali says Pakistan needs judges like Qazi Faez Isa
• MWM senator says legislation becomes questionable when people are abducted, harassed for its sake

ISLAMABAD: Taking part in the debate in the Senate on the 26th Constitution Amendment Bill 2024, senators from the ruling coalition criticised the PTI for not becoming a part of the exercise to introduce essential amendments to the Constitution.

However, the party’s leader in the upper house, Barrister Ali Zafar, said there were several reasons why they had chosen not to become a part of this legislation.

“We were not given the opportunity to consult the founder PTI. There are some clauses in the current draft which are a big stain on democracy and a very serious flaw in it. There are those that will cause us irreparable harm in the future, which will be impossible to change,” he said, adding that most of the points in the current draft would allow the government to appoint judges of its own choice.

He expressed the fear that their “abducted comrades will be presented in the House for the constitutional amendment, who will vote by force or for any other reason.”

“Voting after forcing, beating and abducting people is not consensual, the manner in which the constitutional amendment is being done is not only a crime but also against religious values,” he argued.

Speaking in the Senate, Leader of the House Ishaq Dar said the passage of the constitutional package would be followed by reforms in the criminal justice system, adding that around 100 amendments would be introduced to the 150-year-old Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to ensure cheap and speedy justice.

“What we did today, was to me a curtain-raiser. Our real contribution will be to improve the CrPC as there is a great room for this,” he said while speaking after the House adopted the 26th constitutional amendment bill.

Mr Dar, who is also the deputy prime minister, explained that the amendments would include ensuring early filing and hearing of an appeal or a writ and the courts would be time-bound to decide them.

He said it was the unfinished agenda of the Charter of Democracy that had been fulfilled, which was signed on May 14, 2006 and later almost all others, including Imran Khan, had endorsed it.

PPP parliamentary leader Sherry Rehman said the amendment was not an attack on any institution and that her party chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari demonstrated exemplary leadership throughout this process by ensuring the inclusion of lawyers and civil society, thereby broadening the scope of consultation.

During her speech, Senator Reh­man raised concerns over the current state of the judiciary and asked if the country’s judicial system was not broken. Globally, judges do not decide their own appointments, she said.

JUI-F’s Maulana Attaur Rehman invited PTI members to side with them, as they had got several controversial amendments removed from the package. “We achieved 80-90 per cent through negotiations and if someone sticks to achieving 100pc, then it is better for him to quit politics,” he remarked.

ANP chief Aimal Wali Khan said Pakistan needed judges like Qazi Faez Isa, adding that the country did not need a ‘Lahore Group’. “We are proud that we have stopped the appointment of judges like Saqib Nisar, Justice Gulzar and Justice Khosa in the future,” he maintained.

He accused the PTI of not being serious during the special committee meetings and alleged they would oppose whatever amendments were brought by PML-N.

MQM leader Faisal Sabzwari said that pro-people legislation would help resolve their issues and pointed out that if there would be a separate mechanism (bench) for constitutional and political issues, then the Supreme Court would be able to take up cases of common man.

MWM Senator Allama Raja Nasir Abbas said parliament had the right to amend the Constitution, but it becomes questionable when people are abducted and harassed to get it done. He said if there was a consensus on the amendments, then no one would have objected.

Published in Dawn, October 21th, 2024