JUDICIAL REFORMS--CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDINANCE, 2003

JUDICIAL REFORMS--CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDINANCE, 2003 <!--[if gte mso 10]> JUDICIAL REFORMS--CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDINANCE, 2003 By Qamar‑ul‑lslam, Advocate, Karachi To legislate any law, conduct of segments of society to be effected and the effect of a law is first to be kept in mind. Advocates, address Honourable Judges and even Magistrates as 'me Lord/my Lord' and your Lordship(s) when law allows 'Sir', enter and depart Courtrooms half bow downed. Being taught as one of fundamentals they dare not to annoy Honourable Judges. Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, against it's title, revolves exclusively around Honourable Judges, neither any place is given to Advocates who arc designated as Officers of Courts nor they have been differentiated from public and other segments of society, which missing in repeat in this Ordinance also after departure of Kingdom and country now being independent, is a check on freedom of speech in Courts, which place in fact is specific place of right of speech given, for being heard, to avoid audi altrem partem to achieve dispensing and administra tion of justice. Interestingly like previous Act and Ordinances in this Ordinance also, saving clause is absolutely silent about proceedings in Courtrooms and no protection is given to Litigants and Officers of Court thereby the very purpose of Ordinance itself is defeated. Purpose of Contempt of Court in fact is to ensure of dispensing of justice and enforcement of Courts orders, truthfulness in Courts, pleadings, evidence etc. but the Ordinance is not clear rather is silent on these aspects. It fails to appreciate, rather is taking to occasions, where during arguments one's prayer could be demand of proper hearing, recording of full facts, deliberations of his complete arguments, speaking judicial orders, discussions and distinguish of one's cited judgments which is established generally as universal practice in judicial world. Ordinance was to specifically, clarify and non‑applicability of such occasions. Acts which are not contempt are taken as contempt and acts particularly lie, misstatements and misleading which in fact are contempt find no place in Ordinance. Pakistanis are extreme obedient to persons on seat and positions, entire things surround the persons in power, in line, in waiting and dreaming for power to all disciplines. Unlike Indians. Bengalis, Americans and British, where even sitting Premier Tony Blair has to face tomatoes and eggs throwing by angry public, cannot expect rather are habitual to see and listen that his wife of repute in judicial hierarchy when violates law is only punished. Still being under monarchy, Lord Danning refused to invoke his dual jurisdiction as complainant as well as Judge, in words that I refuse to invoke my dual jurisdiction to act as complainant as well as Judge, I give it to public to decide how respectable am I. Ministries of Law both Federal and Provincial deal with Government departments, as their legal advisors, only giving them opinion as and when sought, fail, rather refuse to serve public interests. Which is one of the basic reasons of no service given for betterment and improvement in fields of drafting of statutes, having out dated draftsmen, leaving more than 99% their basic duties, public suffers for lapses, for which they not only are lucratively paid, like similar and others, unchecked and unaccountable public servants but also given King‑like treatment. No work is done to improve statutes, in light of judgments and orders passed by Superior Courts and global improvements in the field of impart of justice. After independence, necessary amendments were to be trade to statutes to the status of an independent nation, as against the needs, political or otherwise, personal wishes and desires of King of England. Still today, in Pakistan citizens are sent to seek justice on discretions, which jurisdiction may decide a matter rightly or wrongly, whereas an independent person would only permit a matter to be decided rightly only. On mere self‑acquired royalship on innocence of common man, rather on the strength of State power/terrorism, lapses and failure of respective ministries, Federal and Provincial Ministries of Law have been responsible not only to unnecessarily over burden the entire judicial system but‑also deprive litigants, running from post to poles to seek justice, which they might even knowingly and consciously be refused at every stage on point of maintainability and jurisdiction. Ministries of Law through their ill advices are one of the reasons of basic, futile and frivolous litigation generating factors and huge financial burden on public exchequer generating unproductive activities which demands a forthwith check and control. These ministries even today have orthodox draftsmen still drafting statutes in language of `Lekhen Issa Parehn Moosa' who yet have to be taught and educated about modern drafting of statutes, which only can be achieved when they lay down State terrorism and get hold over abilities, patience, tolerance, hardworking, ability to read, write and understand all and not only to read and write on personal likings and disliking, give up lust of power, money, popularity and so many evil things, which they collected in them giving up any good and respect, but demanding forced State respect. Ministries draftsmen's culture, to copy already existing Legislatures or of other countries, `Naqal Ra Aqal' without application of mind and also without taking cognizance of existing conditions is troubling all and particularly honest oppressed class of society the ultimate sufferer. When misuse of State power is working smoothly unchecked and unaccountable then why would care for merit, at appointment or for that purpose at any stage. It is, therefore, suggested that in the interest of justice the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, be suitably amended to help in achieving administration of justice. Fee for Review Petition in Supreme Court of Rs.10,000 be abolished. Suitable amendments in all the statutes are to be made to enlarge the scope of Review at every stage, fixing no time limit to present Review before any Court of law, or any type of limitation, maintainability etc., i.e. matter already decided at respective or higher forum only responsibility of applicant be to identify and point out mistake (s) in order and judgment, to bring impart of justice and supremacy of law above all and ahead of every thing and person, to achieve which all is done, which in fact is completely dragged behind and completely defeated, only because mechanism of check and balance, administrative and judicial accountability is refused from top to bottom and particularly at top.