ISLAMABAD: A senior attorney, who previously represented intelligence agencies in the missing persons case, has approached the Supreme Court with a request to interpret the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) oath and define the COAS’s role in state affairs.
Raja Irshad has submitted a petition to the apex court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.
In his petition, Raja stated, “Article 184 (3) of the Constitution is broad in its scope, allowing an aggrieved person to voice and plead the concerns of society as a whole.”
He emphasized that the present petition raises significant questions concerning the enforcement of fundamental rights outlined in Chapter 1 of Part II of the Constitution. “The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, in Chapter 1 from Article 8 to 28, encompasses fundamental rights. The well-being and civility of the people of Pakistan hinge on the strict adherence to these fundamental rights in both letter and spirit,” the petition asserted.
Article 14 of the Constitution underscores the inviolability of human dignity, describing it as a comprehensive and all-encompassing right that the executive branch of the State often violates. It called upon the Hon’ble Court to intervene on behalf of the countless individuals who find themselves at the mercy of the heavy-handed actions of State executive organs.
Constitutional Crisis
“In light of the aforementioned submissions, we request that this Hon’ble Court declare that Pakistan is grappling with chaotic conditions, anarchy, and lawlessness stemming from a lack of Constitutional Governance in the Country.”
Moreover, the petitioner urged the court to instruct the first five respondents (the president, prime minister, COAS, Ministry of Law and Justice, and Ministry of Defence) to ensure the presence of constitutional governance in the nation.
“This Hon’ble Court is kindly requested to interpret the oath of Respondent No.3 (army chief) to clarify his role in the affairs of the state.”
Additionally, the petition requested that this Hon’ble Court grant any other suitable orders or relief deemed necessary in light of the case’s circumstances to uphold the cause of justice.
