Two Days After the Federal Government Surrendered

Two days after the federal government surrendered the controversial ordinance that gave the conglomerate a 210 million rupee amnesty without prior audit, surrendering to public protest, a hearing hearing on the pending court regarding the development of the gas infrastructure to the Supreme Court You have requested Seth (GIDC) levy.

Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan

Anwar Mansoor Khan filed an official application on Friday to plead with the verdict court to dismiss GIDC-related cases. The application said, “This honorary court is happy to dismiss the case and resolve the case early, as may be convenient to the honorary court. On Wednesday, Prime Minister Lim Ran Khan withdrew the GIDC (Revised) Ordinance 2019 and instructed the Attorney General to move the SC to make an early decision on the matter in accordance with applicable law. The GIDC debate came into the spotlight last week when the government announced a controversial bylaw.

Proposing to grant 218 billion financial pardons to large corporations, including the fertilizer, general industry, power generation companies, K-electricity and CNG sectors. According to a statement from the PM Office, the total amount arising from GIDC lawsuits from 2012 to 2018 increased to Rs 411 billion. AG files a series of hearings on matters involving billions of rupees. On Friday, the AG office filed an application before the Apex court stating that the GIDC Act 2015-related case included a significant amount of government revenue.

The case has been pending since 2017 and has filed a petition for a Peshawar High Court (PHC) ruling in support of a violation of the law. As the incident resulted in a huge amount of government revenue, the court requested that the case be dismissed, and the appeal objected. By 31 May 2017, the PHC rejected a series of petitions claiming the validity of the GIDC Act 2015.

Because the infringement of legislative powers by the Federation does not infringe on the basic rights of citizens, so the higher court, which is the petition. here is no place to challenge the validity of the law because it did not raise a complaint within the meaning of Article 199.

Congress's exclusive authority

The PHC also became clear that when Article 142 (a) was read in conjunction with Article 154 of the Constitution, it was made clear that Congress had exclusive power over the legislation found in Part 2 of the Constitutional Federal Legislative List. Earlier, the GIDC Act approved disciplinary actions for gas consumers outside the domestic sector in the National Assembly in December 2011, approving infrastructure development for a variety of projects, including the Iran-Pakistan pipeline project, the Turkmenistan Afghanistan, Pakistan and India (TAPI) pipeline projects. did.

And for the equalization of prices of imported alternative fuels, including liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects and LPG (liquefied petroleum gas). However, on April 15, 2015, the Apex Court dismissed the federal petition requesting a review of the ruling on August 22, 2014, and under GIDC law, collections exceeding 100 billion rupees will be refunded to consumers in the gas industry. I made it clear that this is not. Who has recovered.

At that time, the GIDC law legalized restorative rest from non-industrial consumers, not primarily industries. Following the expiration of the GIDC Treaty, the National Assembly and Senate passed the GIDC Act of 2015 and abolished the GIDC Act of 2011. One of these petitions was ordered by the lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan, who represents 499 different CNG stations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, to ban or impose GIDC on the gas supplied to CNG stations.

The Supreme Court

The petition also objected to the Supreme Court to order that the court restrict the CNG station from taking compulsory measures, including the interruption of the gas supply while the petition is pending, and therefore order to amend and amend the legislation already issued. The petitioners claimed that the federal government violated Congress' legislative boundaries by enacting the GIDC Act 2015, because legislation that infringes on basic rights is considered invalid and can only be revived or resurrected after the basic rights are enacted or amended.

In this case, the GIDC law violates Articles 153 and 154 of the Constitution and the federal system because it was not previously discussed or approved by the Council of Common Interest (CCI) and its enactments. The petition insisted that any claim that was illegal when imposed could not be verified by subsequent law, and that the tax could not be verified by charging a fee.

After strong reactions

After strong reactions from writers and poets, portraits of legendary poets Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib and Faiz Ahmad Faiz were again displayed in the galleries of the Pakistani Academy of Federal Capital (PAL) building. The portraits of Galip and Faiz, which have been on display in the gallery along with portraits of national poet Al Rama Muhammad Iqbal for many years, are said to have been removed from the verbal instructions of Nadeem Shafique Malik, Minister of National History and Literature and Heritage.

But a PAL spokesman modified the report, claiming that the two portraits were not removed from the gallery. Allegedly deleted photos of two legendary poets under the direction of the secretary. According to sources, Malik said during his recent visit to the PAL building that only portraits of Al Alamqbal should be displayed to remove portraits of Galive and Faiz from the gallery. This move was severely criticized by writers and scholars who were called "rude to legendary poets.

Condemning the steps, the poet Kishwar Naheed demanded the removal of the secretary from his position. She said members of the literary community of the country were shocked by this movement. Naheed also expressed amazement at the statements made by some leaders of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf who ruled on this issue.

Minister of Education Shafqat Mehmood

In the statement of Minister of Education Shafqat Mehmood, the fact that the portraits were once again displayed in the gallery could not eliminate the anger of literary figures about the disrespect for the great poets. She urged all the literary figures of the country to come to the road to register a protest on this matter. The Senate and former Chairman Pakistani People's Party leader Mian Raza Rabbani seriously criticized this step in the statement and called for an investigation into it.

He said, “The poems and poems of those who wrote these letters impressed the progressive creation and political development of Pakistan. Rabani said, “We are writing a letter to the Pakistan Senate State Standing Committee who will be notified of the immediate stu-motu and why Pakistan is being robbed of its cultural heritage. In a statement released on Saturday, PAL declined to report removing portraits of Ghalib and Faiz from the gallery.

A PAL spokesman claimed that the portrait of the great poets was removed from the gallery as a fake campaign. The spokesman claimed that it was not true that the portraits were deleted. The move to exhibit at the Academy's Better Place was being considered. There was no doubt to remove the portrait of a famous scholar.
Previous Post
Next Post