LAHORE, Feb 10 ( Alliance News): The Lahore High Court has ruled that the demand for a presidential system of government in Pakistan is unconstitutional.
According to the details, Justice Jawad Hassan rejected the request to direct the Cabinet Division to decide on the request for holding a referendum on presidential system in the country.
The court said that under Article 199 of the Constitution, a person can be issued a writ of injunction only for the purpose of doing what is required by law.
Hafeez-ur-Rehman Chaudhry, a citizen, had filed several petitions through Barrister Ahmed Pansota, including a request to the Cabinet Division to send the matter to Parliament for consideration, discussion and review of the existing system. And hold a referendum to review the current system and seek public opinion.
The judge asked the lawyer to satisfy the court on the admissibility of the petition, as it was against the basic structure of the constitution and the law enacted by the high courts of Pakistan.
Barrister Ahmed Pansota explained that the reason for filing the petition was simply that the various petitions submitted by the petitioner to the Cabinet Division have not yet been considered or decided.
However, Justice Jawad Hassan in his judgment said that the request for a referendum was against the basic structure of the constitution relating to democracy.
He clarified that the Lahore High Court has already given a detailed verdict in the case of Jamshed Iqbal Cheema v. Election Appellate Tribunal and others after discussing the preamble of the constitution on democracy in 2021, which clearly states that The principles of democracy will be fully respected.
The judge said that in this legal system, such petitions brought before the court would try to change the structure of the constitution, the scope of which was given by the Supreme Court to the District Bar Association, Rawalpindi and others v. Federation of Pakistan. And in other cases.
Justice Jawad Hassan also referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the famous case of ‘Kesavanand v. State of Kerala’ (AIR 1973 Supreme Court 1461) in which he said that the basic structure and framework of the Constitution has not been changed. It can be done because it has made the elected representatives of the country.
Petitioner’s counsel told the court that if the petitioner was given an opportunity to be heard by any of the concerned officers of the Cabinet Division, he would not insist on the matter as the Cabinet could decide any matter under federal law.