Right of self-determination
Right of self-determination legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
"Self-determination"-Meaning.
"Right of self?determination?Meaning.
"Right of self-determination", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/1069
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Right of self-determination"
P L D 1976 Karachi 938
Mirza JAWAD BEG‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: High Court1981 S C M R 341
Mirza JAWAD BEG — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent,
Court: High CourtP L D 1995 Azad J&K 1
AYUB AZEEZ KHAN and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus JAMMU AND KASHMIR COUNCIL through Secretary, Islamabad and 5 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court:P L D 1976 Supreme Court 57
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INTERIOR AND KASHMIR AFFAIRS, ISLAMABAD- Applicant/Referring Authority Versus ABDUL WALI KHAN, M. N. A., FORMER PRESIDENT OF DEFUNCT NATIONAL AWAMI PARTY-Respondent
Court: -- Ss. 6 & 8 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 17(2) Nature and scope of proceedings under S. 6-Jurisdiction of Court in Reference under S. 6-Not analogous to one in writ proceedings so as to be confined to judicial review of executive order-Word "deci sion" in Art. 17(2)-Deliberately used, leaving decision of question, striking at very roots of democracy, to highest judicial forum of country-Dissolution of party takes place not on declaration and publication of Federal Government's satisfaction but on decision of Supreme Court under subsection (2) of S. 6 - Interpretation of statutes-Courts lean in favour of upholding constitutionality of legis lation-Section 6 if read as giving no power to dissolve party and dissolution by operation of law having been made "specifically subject to the provisions of subsection (2)," dissolution by operation of law in consequence, merely in nature of ad interim measure pending .c decision of Supreme Court-Statutory ad interim dissolution to stand automatically vacated on Supreme Court's decision to contrary-Per Muhammad Gul, J. (disagreeing as to point of time from which party stands dissolved): Words "upon" and "subject to the provisions of subsection (2)" occurring in S. 6(1)-Interpretation-Word "upon" in section-Does not necessarily signify dissolution of offending party and forfeiture of its assets to be contemporaneous with publication of declaration in official Gazette-Such results could follow publication of declaration-Phrase "subject to the provisions of subsection (2)" A pointer in same direction-Provision in statute when subject to another provision requiring something to be done, first provision conditional upon performance of requirement of provision referred to-On construction of words "upon such publication" and "subject to the provisions of subsection (2)", therefore, dissolution of a political party and forfeiture of its assets stands postponed until after Reference by Federal Government and decision of Supreme Court and decision of Supreme Court condition precedent for dissolution of party and forfeiture of its assets.P L D 2019 Supreme Court 357
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY and others — Petitioners Versus SUPREME APPELLATE COURT GILGIT-BALTISTAN and others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 2015 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 17
ALI SHAN and 8 others — Appellants Versus IFTIKHAR AHMED and 2 others — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1993 Azad J & K 153
GHULAM HUSSAIN and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Director‑General, ISI Islamabad and 20 others‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑Ss. 2 & 4‑‑‑Foreigners Act (XXXI of 1946), S.2(a) as adapted in Azad Jammu and Kashmir through Azad Jammu and Kashmir Adaption of Laws Act (I of 1959), S.3‑‑‑State subject holding Indian or Pakistan passport whether loses his status of being a State subject and becomes a foreigner by holding a passport of any of the two countries‑‑‑Being a State subject is a status, not a nationality, stricto senso, under the contemporary circumstances and such status was not lost by a State subject by possessing passport of any country much less of India and Pakistan, who are in de facto control of different parts of the State of Jammu and Kashmir‑‑‑State subjects living in either part of the State have no means of travelling around the world except through passport of the country where part of their territory actually falls, without prejudice to their status of being State subjects‑‑‑Passport, thus, would not determine nationality of the State subject, but a document which would legalize his international travel, without affecting his status of being State subject‑‑‑Passport could not even be treated as a proof of the nationality of a person whose residence admittedly falls in the settled territories forming part of India or Pakistan‑‑‑State subject could not be deprived of his right to reside and settle in any part of the State as guaranteed by the Interim Constitution subject to reasonable restrictions‑‑‑Resident of Indian‑held Kashmir is as good a State subject as one residing in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, as none of the two parts of the State is a foreign territory for the other‑‑‑State subject would need‑ no certificate of his being a State subject from Ministry of Interior, Government of Pakistan, as the subject related to Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council which being a part of Azad Jammu and Kashmir State would be subject to jurisdiction of Azad Kashmir Courts in all respects.1999 Y L R 77
JAMMU & KASHMIR COUNCIL FOR HUMAN RIGHTS through Secretary General Syed Nazir Gilani and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary, Muzaffarabad and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Supreme Court (A J & K)P L D 1981 Karachi 457
Mm is RAUF & COMPANY LTD.‑‑Plaintiff Versus ALPHA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KARACHI
Court: S. 8‑Words and phrases‑Civil commotion‑Definition and scope . Words and phrases.2001 P T D 3907
UNIVERSAL AGRO'(PVT.) LTD., KARACHI, Versus SECRETARY, REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
Court: Federal Tax Ombudsman