The federal government of Pakistan has submitted a statement to the Supreme Court, asserting that any interpretation of the Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B) Order 2018 would be beyond its authority (ultra vires) and without jurisdiction.
The statement was submitted in response to a constitutional petition filed by G-B Chief Minister Khalid Khurshid Khan, which challenged the appointment and extension of superior court judges in the region. According to the government, only the courts of G-B have the jurisdiction to deal with matters related to the territory of G-B or to interpret the G-B Order 2018.
In September of the previous year, CM Khan filed the petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, claiming that the extension granted to three G-B Chief Court judges was initiated without consulting him. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif had given the extension following a summary moved by G-B Governor Syed Mahdi Shah.
The government argues that the appointment of the chief judge/judge was made in compliance with Article 84(6) of Order 2018, which states that the prime minister shall appoint the chief judge/judge on the governor’s advice. Therefore, the petitioner’s claim that the governor should have acted according to the chief minister’s advice under Article 34 is considered unfounded by the government.
The statement also emphasizes that if the governor were required to act solely on the advice of the chief minister and the prime minister were to act only on the advice rendered by the governor. The chief minister would have the exclusive authority to determine the appointment of the chief judge/judge. The government believes that such an eventuality is beyond the prudent interpretation of the statute and the legislature’s apparent intent.
Furthermore, the statement points out that if the legislature intended for the governor to act exclusively on the chief minister’s advice, it would have incorporated this requirement within the provision of Article 84(6). It also highlights that Article 34 of the Order 2018 primarily pertains to the ordinary business of the government and is not a qualifying provision of Article 84.
A three-judge apex court bench is set to resume the case hearing.
