IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad S. 21---Public servant---Scope---Every officer remunerated by the fees or commission for the performance of any public duty is a public servant under Section 21, P.P.C., irrespective of the fact whether the fee is paid by the Government or by any other public body or by an Act of Parliament under the Constitution. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3)---Legislation---Judicial review---Scope---Courts cannot force the legislature to act upon their recommendations nor can they strike down any law competently enacted by the legislature which does not commensurate with their recommendations. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3)---Constitutional petition under art. 184(3) of the Constitution filed before the Supreme Court---antecedents or standing of the petitioner---Not relevant---When the Supreme Court exercises jurisdiction under article 184(3) of the Constitution it is not concerned with the antecedents or standing of the person who has filed the petition because that person is merely acting as an informant---Instead, the Court favours a substantive approach focusing more on the content of the petition and whether the same crosses the threshold set out in article 184(3)---Locus standi (of petitioner) is not an impediment when the Court is exercising original jurisdiction (under art. 184(3) of the Constitution). Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3)---Legislation---Judicial review---Scope---Locus standi of a Parliamentarian to challenge the constitutional validity of an act of Parliament---Parliament is a constitutional body, but being comprised of the chosen representatives of the people of Pakistan it attains the status of a prime constitutional body---any action made or decision taken by the majority of a constitutional body is taken to be and treated as an action or decision of that body as a whole comprising of all its members, not only of those who voted for that action or decision---any member of a constitutional body who was in the minority in making that decision can not challenge the validity of that decision in court---Principle that decisions taken by a majority of members in a constitutional body (like a parliament or legislature) usually cannot be directly challenged in court by those in the minority is rooted in the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and the separation of powers---Democratic systems are often built on the principle of majority rule; this ensures that decisions reflect the will of the majority while still respecting the rights of the minority---allowing minority members to easily challenge majority decisions would undermine this fundamental democratic principle. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3)---Constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under art. 184(3) of the Constitution---Scope---Vires of legislation---Supreme Court can consider and decide the vires of legislation in its original jurisdiction. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Part.II, Chapt. 1---Fundamental rights---New rights---Objective criterion for recognizing new rights as fundamental rights---Objective criterion in such regard is to see whether the claimed right is an integral part of a named fundamental right or partakes of the same basic nature and character as the named fundamental right so that the exercise of such right is in reality and substance nothing but an instance of the exercise of the named fundamental right---Right is an integral part of a named fundamental right which gives life and substance to the named fundamental right. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 175(3)---Trichotomy of power, principle of---Scope---Constitution of Pakistan is based on the principle of trichotomy of power in which legislature, executive and judiciary have their separately delineated functions---Legislature is assigned the function to legislate laws, the executive to execute laws and the judiciary to interpret laws---None of these three organs are dependent upon the other in the performance of its functions nor can one claim superiority over the others---Each enjoys complete independence in their own sphere and is the master in its own assigned field under the Constitution---any one of these three organs cannot usurp or interfere in the exercise of each other's functions, nor can one encroach upon the field of the others---This trichotomy of power is so important that it is said to be a basic feature of the Constitution, a cornerstone of the Constitution, a fundamental principle of the constitutional construct, and one of the foundational principles of the Constitution. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Ss. 4, 5(n), 5(o), 9(a)(v), 14, 21(g) & 25(b)---National Accountability (Amendment) Act (XI of 2022), Ss. 2, 8, 10 & 14---National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act (XVI of 2022), Ss. 2, 3 & 14---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 21---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), Ss. 2 & 5---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.122---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 9, 14, 23, 24, 25, 175(3) & 184(3)---Constitutional petition filed before the Supreme Court challenging amendments made to the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 ("NAB Ordinance") by the National Accountability (Amendment) Act, 2022 ("First Amendment") and the National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act, 2022 ("Second Amendment") (collectively referred to as the "2022 Amendments")---Vires of the "2022 Amendments"---The 2022 Amendments in no way take away or abridge any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution to the people of Pakistan---Even after the 2022 Amendments elected holders of public offices (members of Parliament, Provincial Assemblies and Local Government Bodies, etc.) are still triable under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 ('PCA') and the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 ('P.P.C.')---Changes brought about by the 2022 Amendments relate to criminal law, criminal procedure and rules of evidence and fall within the legislative competence of the Parliament and in no way take away or abridge any of the fundamental rights---If Parliament can enact the NAB Ordinance in the exercise of its ordinary legislative power, it can surely amend the same in the exercise of the same legislative power---Detailed reasons given by His Lordship for disagreeing with the majority view stated. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Legislative power of Parliament---Scope---Doctrines of exhaustion and functus officio---Not applicable---What Parliament has done, Parliament can undo---Legislative power of Parliament does not exhaust by enactment of any law nor does Parliament become functus officio by making a law, on a particular subject---Doctrines of exhaustion and functus officio are not applicable to legislative powers---Legislature that has made any law is competent to change, annul, re-frame or add to that law---Even the legislature of today cannot enact a law, whereby the powers of a future legislature or of its own to amend a law are curtailed. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Proviso to a section---Scope---Whilst a proviso can qualify or create an exception to the main section it cannot nullify the same. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Ss. 9 & 10---Prevention of Corruption act (II of 1947), Ss. 2 & 5---Judges of the constitutional courts and Members of the armed Forces---accountable and fully liable under the National accountability Ordinance, 1999 and the Prevention of Corruption act, 1947, like any other public servant of Pakistan. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Ss. 4, 5(n), 5(o), 9(a)(v), 14, 21(g) & 25(b)---National Accountability (Amendment) Act (XI of 2022), Ss. 2, 8, 10 & 14---National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act (XVI of 2022), Ss. 2, 3 & 14---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 9, 14, 23, 24 & 184(3)---Constitutional petition filed before the Supreme Court challenging amendments made to the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 ("NAB Ordinance") by the National Accountability (Amendment) Act, 2022 ("First Amendment") and the National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act, 2022 ("Second Amendment") (collectively referred to as the "2022 Amendments")---Maintainability---The 2022 Amendments have rendered the NAB toothless in accomplishing its objective of eradicating corruption and corrupt practices and holding accountable all those persons accused of such practices and have left public property belonging to the people of Pakistan vulnerable to waste and malfeasance by the holders of public office, thereby ex-facie violating Articles 9, 14, 23 and 24 of the Constitution---Detailed reasons for finding the present Constitutional petition as maintainable stated. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Part.II, Chapt. 1---Fundamental rights, interpretation of---Progressive, liberal and dynamic approach---Fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution, an organic instrument, are not capable of precise or permanent definition delineating their meaning and scope for all times to come---With the passage of time, changes occur in the political, social and economic conditions of the society, which requires re-evaluation of their meaning and scope in consonance with the changed conditions---Therefore, keeping in view the prevailing socio-economic and politico-cultural values and ideals of the society, the courts are to construe the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution with a progressive, liberal and dynamic approach---But this does not mean that the judges are at liberty to give any artificial meaning to the words and expressions used in the provisions of the fundamental rights, on the basis of their subjective ideological considerations---Progressive, liberal and dynamic approach in construing fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution must be guided by an objective criterion, not by subjective inclination. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad Ss. 4, 5(n), 5(o), 9(a)(v), 14, 21(g) & 25(b)---National Accountability (Amendment) Act (XI of 2022), Ss. 2, 8, 10 & 14---National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act (XVI of 2022), Ss. 2, 3 & 14---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 21---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), Ss. 2 & 5---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 9, 14, 23, 24, 25, 62(1)(f), 175(3), 184(3) & 260(1)---Constitutional petition filed before the Supreme Court challenging amendments made to the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 ("NAB Ordinance") by the National Accountability (Amendment) Act, 2022 ("First Amendment") and the National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act, 2022 ("Second Amendment") (collectively referred to as the "2022 Amendments")---Vires of the "2022 Amendments"---Supreme Court declared sections 2, 8, 10 & 14 of the First Amendment and sections 2, 3 & 14 of the Second Amendment as ultra vires the Constitution---Detailed reasons for finding the said sections as ultra vires the Constitution stated. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3) & Part.II, Chapt. 1---Legislation---Judicial review---Scope---Courts can judicially review the acts of the legislators if they offend the Constitution, in particular the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution---While examining this conflict of rights and the legislation, the courts must consider that they are dealing with a legislative document that represents multiple voices, myriad policy issues and reflective of public ethos and interests, voiced through the chosen representatives of the people; and remembering that undermining the legislature undermines democracy---With this background, only if such a legislation is in conflict and in violation of the fundamental rights or the express provisions of the Constitution, can the courts interfere and overturn such a legislation. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad S. 21---Prevention of Corruption act (II of 1947), Ss. 2 & 5---Public servant---Scope---Member of Parliament---To fall within the scope of the definition of "public servant" a person should be an officer; he should perform any public duty; and he should be remunerated by fees or commission for the performance of that public duty---Member of Parliament is "holder of an office" and is thus an "officer" within the meaning and scope of this term used in clause ninth of Section 21, P.P.C.---Person in his position as a member of Parliament does perform a "public duty"---Furthermore a member of Parliament is, remunerated by fees (salary and allowances) for the performance of public duties---Member of Parliament, thus, fulfills all the three conditions to fall within the scope of the definition of "public servant" provided in the second limb of the latter part of clause ninth of Section 21, P.P.C., and is, therefore, triable as a "public servant" for the alleged commission of an offence of corruption and corrupt practices (criminal misconduct) under the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption act, 1947. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad art. 184(3)--- Legislation--- Judicial review--- Scope--- Judicial restraint, doctrine of---Courts have formulated the doctrine of judicial restraint which urges Judges considering constitutional questions to give deference to the views of the elected branches and invalidate their actions only when constitutional limits have clearly been violated---as the legislative acts of a legislature are the manifestation of the will of the people exercised through their chosen representatives, the courts tread carefully to judicially review them and strike them down only when their constitutional invalidity is clearly established beyond any reasonable doubt---Reasonable doubt is resolved in favour of the constitutional validity of the law enacted by a competent legislature by giving a constitution-compliant interpretation to the words that create such doubt.

IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad S — 2024 PLD 102 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD