h1

P L D 2001 SC 233

WASIM SAJJAD AND OTHERS

V/S

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY CABINET DIVISION AND OTHERS

CHECKS AND BALANCES/ARTICLE 58(2)(b)After deletion of Article 58(2)(b) checks and balances were removed and the balance of power disturbed. [p. 306] LL

Reference to suggestions by Justice Hamoodur Rehman regarding amendment of the Constitution in respect of powers of the President, “Power”, it is said, “corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. [p. 306, 307] MM

After careful analysis of the above material, we are of the view that it is never safe to confer unfettered powers on a person who is holding the reins of the affairs of the country as is embedded in the saying. ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’. Accordingly, while upholding the judgment in Mehmood Achakzai’s case (supra) we would like to observe that probably the situation could have been avoided if checks and balances governing the powers of the President and the Prime Minister had been in the field by means of Article 58(2)(b). [p. 307] NN

RIDICULING THE JUDICIARY

Disparaging remarks against the judiciary crossed all limits with the rendering of judgment in Sh. Liaqat Hussain.

The decision in Sh. Liaqat Hussain was treated as a stumbling block and taping of telephones and eavesdropping were resorted to. [p. 307] OO

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: