| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 3017 2023 SLD 3017 = 2023 PLD 42 |
CONSTITUTION PETITION NO.2 OF 2022 (Re: restraining Political Parties from holding Public Meetings in Islamabad before Voting on No-confidence Motion). REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2022 (Reference by the President of Islamic Republic of Pakistan under Article 186 of the Constitution, seeking interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution). CONSTITUTION PETITION NO.9 OF 2022 (Re: Imposing Life Time Ban from contesting Elections on defection from Political Party). Constitution Petitions Nos.2, 9 and Reference No. 1 of 2022, decided on 17th May, 2022.
Present: Umar Ata Bandial, C.J., Ijaz ul Ahsan, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Munib Akhtar and Jamal Khan Mandokhail, JJ
For Federation Ashtar Ausaf Ali, A.G.P., Khalid Javed Khan, A.G.P. (Former) Ch. Aamir Rehman, Addl. A.G., Sohail Mehmood, Addl. A.G.P. Syed Nayyab Hassan Gardezi, D.A.G. assisted by Munawar Duggal, Advocate Supreme Court, Barrister Asad Rahim Khan, Barrister M. Usama Rauf, M. Usman Peracha, Advocate and M. Ibrahim Khan, Advocate. For PTI Ali Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and Dr. Babar Awan, Advocate Supreme Court. For SCBA Mansoor Usman, Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Asfandyar Khan, Advocate, Ahsan Bhoon, President (SCBAP), Waseem Mumtaz Malik, Sec. (SCBAP) and Anis M. Shahzad, Advocate-on-Record. For PPPP Farooq H. Naek, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, Mian Raza Rabbani, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Zeeshan Abdullah, Advocate. For JUI(P) Kamran Murtaza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Qari Abdul Rasheed, Advocate Supreme Court. For PML(N) Makhdoom Ali Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court along with Saad M. Hashmi, Advocate, Sarmad Hani, Advocate, Ammar Cheema, Advocate and Yawar Mukhtar, Advocate. For BNP(M) Mustafa Ramday, Advocate Supreme Court, Rashid Hafeez, Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Ahmed Junaid, Advocate, Akbar Khan, Advocate, Barrister Maria Haq, Advocate and Ms. Zoe Khan, Advocate. For NA Abdul Latif Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court, Tahir Hussain, Sec. NA and M. Mushtaq, Addl. Sec. For PML (Q) Azhar Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court. For Balochistan. M. Asif Reki, AG amd M. Ayaz Sawati, Addl AG. For ICT Niazullah Khan Niazi, AG ICT. For Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Shumail Butt, AG KP, Atif Ali Khan, Addl. AG and Mian Shafaqat Jan, Addl. A.G. For Punjab Ahmed Awais, AG (Punjab) and Qasim Ali Chohan, Addl. AG Punjab. For Sindh Salman Talibuddin, AG Sindh and Fauzi Zafar, Addl. AG. Hassan Irfan Khan, Advocate Supreme Court. Dates of hearing: 19th, 21st, 24th, 25th, 28th to 30th March, 2022, 4th to 7th, 18th to 22nd April, 2022, 9th to 11th, 16th and 17th May, 2022.
SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION OF PAKISTAN through President and another---Petitioners
VERSUS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Interior Islamabad and others---Respondents
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 17(2) , 63-A , 63-A(1)(b) , 55, 63(1)(p), 63-A, 95, 136 & 186
(a) Interpretation of Constitution---
----Interpretation of 'Constitution' and interpretation of a 'statute'---Distinction stated.
There is a distinction between "interpreting" a statute and "interpreting" a constitution. While the tools developed for the former exercise (the rules of statutory interpretation) can be, and are, deployed while undertaking the latter, and much the same language used in the case law, the function of the Court is different. In the first, the Court is concerned primarily with ascertaining the legislative intent of a particular statute. In the second it is tasked with discovering the meaning of a text that is not merely the source and creator of the subject matter of the first (i.e., the laws) but even of the very organ that has the competence to issue them. Laws, in this sense, are transient no matter how long a particular statute may last, or the subject matter remain on the statute book. Constitutions on the other hand are to last a while. Statutes are designed to meet the fugitive exigencies of the hour whereas a Constitution is intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs.
McCulloch v. Maryland 17 US (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819) and Marbury v. Madison 5 US (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) ref.