Giving ruling on a criticism filed towards Lt Gen (R) Faiz Hameed, apex courtroom says its direct intervention beneath Article 184(3) of the Structure might adversely have an effect on rights of others.
ISLAMABAD – Giving its written order on a plea filed towards former Director Common Inter-Providers Intelligence (ISI), Lt-Gen (retd) Faiz Hameed by the personaler of a housing society, the Supreme Courtroom dominated the allegations are of a particularly severe nature, and if true, undoubtedly would undermine the repute of the Federal Government, the Armed Forces, ISI and Pakistan Rangers, due to this fact, it can’t be left unattended.
Nonetheless, the character of a case filed beneath Article 184(3) of the Constitution is completely different from different instances, for quite a few causes, the courtroom dominated.
The three-member bench of the apex bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Athar Minallah, and Justice Aminuddin Khan, had disposed of the constitutional petition final week. The petitioner, who’s the proprietor of High Metropolis Housing Society, had alleged that Lt Gen Faiz Hameed, who was then serving within the Armed Forces and dealing with ISI, misused his workplace, and on his directions crimes have been dedicated towards the applicant and his household by raiding his residence and enterprise places of work; detaining the applicant and his family members and robbing him and his members of the family of their properties. The apex courtroom noted in its written order that the respondent No. 1 is the ‘Federation of Pakistan’, respondents No. 2 to four are named officers of the Armed Forces, and so they and respondent No. 5 have been, on the relevant time, working within the ISI and respondent No. 6 are ‘100 unrecognized individuals’. “We enquired from the discovered counsel how Article 184(3) of the Constitution could possibly be invoked in respect of a personal criticism/grievance, how the appliance could possibly be categorized as a matter of public significance and enforcement of which elementary rights was sought,” added the bench.
It additional stated that the counsel Hafeez-ur-Rehman Ch. stated that the respondents No. 2 to five had violated the fundamental rights of the applicant once they used their essential positions. He additional said that no authority would entertain a criticism/grievance, not to mention proceed towards them.
Then, the Extra Attorney-Common for Pakistan (AAG) was known as upon to help the Courtroom and was enquired whether the applicant has another sufficient alternate treatment, and whether or not his apprehension that his criticism/grievance wouldn’t be heard is appropriate. The AAG said that there are a variety of cures out there to the applicant, together with approaching the Ministry of Defence because the complaint/grievance pertains to a interval when the stated respondents have been serving officers within the Armed Forces and/or to file a felony case, together with one for malicious prosecution, and/or to file a go well with for damages, or to do all these. The AAG additionally said that if a criticism is addressed to the Ministry of Defence of the Authorities of Pakistan it will likely be given due consideration.
The bench said within the order, “Firstly, the Supreme Courtroom under Article 184(3) of the Constitution workouts unique energy, and every time unique energy is exercised it have to be completed cautiously. Secondly, the place there exists different discussion board(s) to take care of the identical it’s best that they first accomplish that. Thirdly, towards the decision of a Excessive Courtroom appeals might come earlier than this Courtroom beneath Article 185 of the Structure. Fourthly, direct intervention by this Courtroom beneath Article 184(3) of the Structure might adversarially have an effect on the rights of others.”
Nonetheless, the apex courtroom stated, “The applicant apprehends that his criticism/grievance wouldn’t be entertained by the Minisstrive of Defence, as a result of the stated respondents had held senior positions within the Armed Forces. Nonetheless, the discovered AAG has assured us that the criticism/grievance shall be given due consideration, and we’ve no reason to doubt this assertion made on behalf of the Government of Pakistan, due to this fact, the apprehension of the applicant is misplaced. Accordingly, if the applicant submits a criticism/grievance to the Ministry of Defence of the Authorities of Pakistan, it shall be handled in accordance with regulation. “ It continued that the applicant will even be at liberty to avail the above-mentioned, and another authorized remedies, in accordance with regulation. Later, the bench disposed of the plea.