KARACHI, July 15: A five-member Supreme Court bench will commence hearing of a presidential reference, questioning the constitutional validity of the NWFP Hasba bill, in Islamabad on July 25.

Attorney-General Makhdoom Ali Khan moved the reference on behalf of President Pervez Musharraf at the Supreme Court registry here on Friday.

Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry constituted a bench, headed by himself and comprising Justices Hamid Ali Mirza, Faqir Mohammad Khokhar, M. Javed Buttar and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, to hear the reference.

The bench decided to issue notices to the NWFP government and the advocates-general of the four provinces for July 25.

The Hasba Bill, moved by the NWFP’s Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal government, was adopted by the provincial assembly on Thursday by 68 votes to 34 against, despite warnings by the provincial governor and the federal authorities against its constitutionality and vociferous protests by opposition MPAs terming it as repugnant to basic human rights guaranteed by the constitution. The bill requires the governor’s assent to become an act of the assembly.

The reference has been filed under article 186 of the constitution, which empowers the president to refer to the Supreme Court any question of law of public importance.

The court is to consider the question so referred under its advisory jurisdiction and report its opinion to the president.

The reference raises the following questions about the Hasba Bill:

1. Whether the bill or any of its provisions will be constitutionally valid if enacted?

2. Whether the bill or any of its provisions will, if enacted, be violative the fundamental rights guaranteed in part II, chapter 1, of the constitution, including but not confined to articles 9, 14,16, 17, 18, 19,20, 22 and 25?

3. Whether the bill or any of its provisions will, if enacted, also be violative of articles 2A, 4, 203G, 212, 229 and 230 of the constitution?

4. Whether the enactment of the bill will encroach upon an occupied field and violate the constitution by creating a parallel judicial system, undermine independence of judiciary and deny citizens the right of access to justice.

5. Whether the enactment of the bill will violate the principle of separation of powers enshrined in the constitution?

6. Whether the bill, and in particular its sections 10 and 23, are unconstitutionally wide and vague and suffer from excessive delegation of powers?

7. If the answer to any one or more of the above questions is in affirmative, whether the NWFP governor is obliged to sign the bill into law?

The articles referred to in question two ensure guarantee of person, inviolability of dignity of man, freedom of assembly, association, trade, business or profession, freedom of speech, freedom to profess religion and manage religious institutions, safeguards as to educational institutions in respect of religion and equality of citizens and prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender.

The articles mentioned in question three make the Objectives Resolution a substantive part of the constitution, guarantee the right of individuals to be dealt with in accordance with law and to enjoy equal protection of law, confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Federal Shariat Court and administrative courts and tribunals in respect of matters falling within their purview, provide for reference to the Islamic Ideology Council of laws to ascertain their repugnance or otherwise to Islamic injunctions and deal with the functions of the council.