[ad_1]
- Verdict reserved on petition associated to details about SC workers.
- SC tells AGP Awan to submit replies to queries inside two weeks.
- Underneath RTI, armed forces “couldn’t be requested to share info”.
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Courtroom (SC) Wednesday reserved its verdict on a petition associated to Proper To Info in search of details about its workers in addition to recruitments made to fill the vacant positions within the apex court docket.
A 3-member SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Athar Minallah, reserved the decision after listening to arguments of the Lawyer Common for Pakistan (AGP) and the petitioner.
The CJP remarked that every one, together with the apex court docket, had been sure to abide by the legal guidelines made by the parliament, however the petitioner had raised very complicated authorized factors within the present case.
He remarked that the court docket would additionally study the observe being adopted on this regard by different international locations on the planet.
It directed the petitioner in addition to AGP Mansoor Usman Awan to submit replies to the queries requested by the bench inside two weeks. In 2019, one Mukhtar Ahmed Ali filed a petition within the apex court docket beneath the Proper To Info (RTI) regulation to demand details about the workers of the apex court docket and the recruitments made to fill within the vacant positions there.
The registrar of the Supreme Courtroom had filed a petition within the Islamabad Excessive Courtroom via Further Lawyer Common Chaudhry Aamir Rehman towards the Fee’s July 12, 2021 order, which directed the SC registrar to share with the appellant the requested info on the earliest, however not later than 20 working days of the receipt of the order.
The SC registrar had contended earlier than the IHC that the Pakistan Info Fee (PIC) couldn’t cross such an order relating to constitutional courts as its jurisdiction was confined solely to these departments which might be established beneath statute or regulation.
On Wednesday, the petitioner appeared earlier than the court docket in particular person whereas Chief Justice Isa requested the petitioner why he was in search of this info.
The petitioner replied that he had sought the small print beneath the RTI Act, including that though he was not sure to provide the explanations, he may clarify why he sought such particulars.
The chief justice agreed to the petitioner’s reply however stated he simply needed to know for his information.
The petitioner submitted that he was engaged on the transparency of the nation’s establishments, which is why he sought the small print in regards to the apex court docket.
Lawyer Common Awan submitted that the SC registrar had challenged the order of the PIC in IHC and a single bench had given its choice towards which the petitioner had filed an enchantment within the apex court docket.
CJP Isa raised a query that if the PIC requested for making public particulars of judges’ personal households sooner or later, then what would occur? Whether or not it might be ignored or may very well be challenged.
Justice Minallah, whereas including to the query, requested whether or not the order of PIC could be challenged by the relations of the judges or the Supreme Courtroom itself.
The petitioner submitted that the PIC order was challenged within the Islamabad Excessive Courtroom by the SC registrar via Further Lawyer Common Chaudhry Aamir Rehman.
The attorney-general, to a court docket question, submitted that the SC registrar had employed the providers of Chaudhry Aamir Rehman not in a authorities capability.
The AGP, whereas replying to a court docket question, submitted that beneath Article 19-A of the Structure, the SC had no immunity in regards to the Entry to Info Act 2017.
He submitted that the Supreme Courtroom may make amendments to its guidelines within the public curiosity and appoint an officer who may present info to the general public on demand.
The attorney-general submitted that the court docket may regulate the method of offering info to the general public however couldn’t refuse the data.
At this, Justice Minallah requested the AG whether or not the independence of the judiciary wouldn’t be affected whereas in search of details about it.
Whether or not the armed forces of Pakistan are additionally sure to supply info beneath the Entry to Info Act 2017, Justice Athar Minallah requested the AG.
The AG, nonetheless, replied that beneath this regulation, the armed forces couldn’t be requested to share info.
At this, Justice Minallah remarked as as to if it’s not towards Article 19-A of the Structure when entry to info couldn’t be utilized there. Later, the court docket reserved the decision on the matter.
Initially revealed in The Information
[ad_2]
Source link
