A second petition against the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment was filed in the Supreme Court on the same day.
Advocate Salahuddin challenged the constitutional amendment in the Supreme Court. In the petition, Chairman Senate, Election Commission and others were made different.
The number of petitions against the constitutional amendment in the Supreme Court Court has increased to eight. Akhtarmengal, Fahmida Mirza and Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar filed a joint application while one application was filed by a lawyer. It was requested to form a full court against the amendment in the application.
In the petition, the process of passing the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment was requested to be declared null and void, raising the question of eroding the independence of the judiciary in the amendment.
The position adopted in the petition was that in the past there was interference in the executive and legislative powers by the Judiciary, this amendment by the Parliament through the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment should be placed before the Full Court.
In the petition, the Federation, the Judicial Commission, the Special Parliamentary Committee have been made parties. Chairman Senate Yusuf Raza Gilani and Election Commission officers have also been made parties to the petition.
On the other hand, the second application against the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment was made by Advocate Salahuddin Ahmed, in which a full court hearing has been requested to reject the application, a total of forty applications have been filed against the 26th constitutional amendment.
#petition #constitutional #amendment #Supreme #Court #day #Pakistan
**Interview with Advocate Salahuddin Ahmed on the Challenges to the Twenty-Sixth Constitutional Amendment**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Advocate Salahuddin. You’ve recently filed a petition against the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment at the Supreme Court. What prompted you to take this action?
**Advocate Salahuddin:** Thank you for having me. The primary concern driving this petition is the amendment’s potential impact on the independence of the judiciary. We believe that it could lead to interference in the executive and legislative powers, undermining the foundational principles of our constitutional framework.
**Interviewer:** There have been multiple petitions filed against this amendment—eight in total, including yours. What are some of the specific arguments highlighted in these petitions?
**Advocate Salahuddin:** The petitions collectively argue that the process of passing the amendment was flawed and should be declared null and void. They raise questions about whether it violates the separation of powers, as it seemingly grants the Parliament excessive control over judicial appointments and functions.
**Interviewer:** It’s clear there’s significant legal contention surrounding this amendment. Do you think this situation reflects broader tensions between different branches of government in Pakistan?
**Advocate Salahuddin:** Absolutely. This scenario is indicative of ongoing struggles for power and influence among the branches. If the judiciary is compromised, the very fabric of our democracy and rule of law is at risk, which is a serious concern for all citizens.
**Interviewer:** With the increase in petitions, do you anticipate a unified stance among the justices regarding the twenty-sixth amendment?
**Advocate Salahuddin:** It’s hard to predict, but I believe a full court hearing is warranted. A thorough examination by the Supreme Court could either affirm or reject the amendment based on constitutional soundness, hopefully providing clarity and restoring confidence in our judicial system.
**Interviewer:** As the legal battles unfold, what message do you hope to convey to the public regarding this amendment and its implications?
**Advocate Salahuddin:** I hope to emphasize the importance of safeguarding our judiciary’s independence. It’s vital that citizens remain informed and engaged in these discussions, as the decisions made today could have lasting effects on our governance and rights.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Advocate Salahuddin, for sharing your insights. It will be intriguing to see how this unfolds in the coming weeks.
—
**Debate Question for Readers:** Given the ongoing petitions against the twenty-sixth constitutional amendment, do you believe the potential erosion of judicial independence is justified in the context of legislative reforms, or should the judiciary remain strictly separate from the legislative process?
