Judicial reforms not limited to constitutional courts: Bilawal.
Says constitutional courts to help resolve constitutional issues.
The people have “given PPP mandate” to establish the courts.
KARACHI: Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari has said opposition to the judicial reforms including establishing federal constitutional courts is based on personal likes and dislikes.
The remarks come after the government failed to secure the magic number to sail through the bill to amend the Constitution last month, as its allies as well as members from the opposition benches vehemently opposed the proposal, forcing the administration to begin a consultation process.
Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) Chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who is a key player in influencing the passing of the bill in parliament, on October 11 showed a willingness to support the government’s “constitutional package” with “ifs and buts”, while stressing the need for building consensus among all political forces.
On the other hand, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has also raised objections to the constitutional package, which among other things includes the establishment of the constitutional court.
In a message on X, the PPP chairman said many of those opposing the reforms now because of party position, had supported it in the past.
“While many of today’s opponents have supported this reform in the past. Their opposition today is based on personal likes and dislikes or partisan positions on the politics of the moment,” he wrote in a tweet.
On the other hand, Bilawal said that the establishment of a federal constitutional court had been a part of his party’s manifesto since the 2007 elections after the Charter of Democracy in 2006.
He also attached the relevant portions of the Charter of Democracy and the party’s manifestos of 2013 and 2024 with his message.
“The PPP has fought every election since 2007 with the manifesto pledge of implementing judicial reforms including but not limited to establishing federal constitutional courts,” he said, adding the PPP’s permanent party position for almost two decades had remained consistent.
“Our representatives elected in every election under my Chairmanship of this party have been given the mandate by the people of Pakistan to establish a Federal Constitutional Court with equal representation for all.”
In a statement a day ago, the PPP chairman suggested that establishing a constitutional court alongside regular courts could help resolve constitutional issues and protect fundamental rights.
He said that if there was a dispute between the federation and a province, there should be a platform to resolve such issues.
He also reaffirmed the party’s two demands — the establishment of a constitutional court and the reform of the judicial appointment process. Both of which, he said, were laid out in the Charter of Democracy.
Moreover, PPP sources said that Bilawal and Fazl would bring up several crucial matters including the constitutional tweaks in a meeting today’s evening.
A day ago, the PPP chief said he would meet the JUI-F chief on the issue of judicial reforms on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, the JUI-F asked the government to secure consensus on the amendment by bringing the PTI on board as well.
Speaking to Geo News’ programme “Capital Talk”, JUI-F’s Senator Kamran Murtaza said that they could not ignore the PTI and that the Constitution could not be called a consensus-oriented one if the Imran Khan-founded party was not on board.
Whereas, the JUI-F on October 12 suggested the government constitute a constitutional bench instead of establishing a separate court to hear constitutional matters.
The JUI-F proposed this during a meeting of the special parliamentary committee formed to discuss the contentious constitutional amendment. The JUI-F chief and PTI senior leader Asad Qaiser attended the key meeting via video link, while Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari was not among the attendees.
Hoping to reach a consensus with the PPP on a joint draft, JUI-F Senator Murtaza said the drafts prepared by the two parties had just one difference between the constitutional court and the constitutional bench. Otherwise, he said, his party had no objection to the PPP’s rest of the draft.