PTBP Web Desk
The government has announced its intent to challenge a ruling by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah of the Supreme Court regarding the contempt case against Additional Registrar Nazar Abbas. This decision was disclosed by the Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP), Mansoor Usman Awan, during the hearing of the Customs Regulator Duty case, which underscores the tension between judicial and administrative functions within the country’s legal system.
The controversy began when the Supreme Court issued a show-cause notice of contempt to its Additional Registrar, Nazar Abbas, on January 20, ordering him to appear in person. This was in response to actions perceived to contravene judicial orders. However, on Monday, the Supreme Court, under the guidance of Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, withdrew this notice, concluding that there was no deliberate intent of contempt on Abbas’ part and that no harm was suffered by any party involved due to his actions.
AGP Mansoor Usman Awan revealed plans to file an appeal against the decision made by Justice Shah, arguing for a reevaluation of the case’s handling. Additionally, the government intends to file a review petition against two specific orders issued by Justice Shah on January 16 and January 13, which are seen as pivotal in the ongoing legal discourse surrounding the authority of administrative versus judicial orders within the Supreme Court.
The judgment by Justice Shah clarified a critical legal principle: the Practice and Procedure Committee does not possess the authority to withdraw a case following a judicial order. Moreover, the Supreme Court explicitly stated that an administrative order cannot supersede a judicial one, highlighting the limits of administrative bodies in judicial matters. This ruling has sparked a debate on the separation of powers within the judiciary, particularly regarding how administrative functions should interact with judicial processes.
The matter has now been referred by the bench to the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) for consideration by a full court. This step indicates the complexity and significance of the case, potentially setting precedents for how similar issues are treated in the future. The suggestion to involve the full bench underscores the gravity of ensuring that the judiciary maintains its integrity and independence from administrative overreach.
This legal tussle brings to light several issues pertinent to Pakistan’s legal system:
Judicial Autonomy: The case exemplifies the importance of judicial independence, where judicial decisions should not be influenced or overridden by administrative actions.
Administrative Overreach: There’s an ongoing debate about the extent to which administrative bodies can involve themselves in judicial processes, especially when it comes to the enforcement of court orders.
Legal Precedents: The outcome of this appeal and review could set important precedents regarding judicial vs. administrative authority, potentially affecting how similar cases are handled in the future.
