Speaker 1: Hafiz Ahsan Ahmed is with us and we will talk to him about the importance of this amendment, but why opposition parties are not being given clarity on this issue. Thank you very much for your time, Hafiz. On one hand, the legal points of this amendment are that the government wants to reduce the burden of increasing cases on the judicial system. But on the other hand, what kind of a government is this? Opposition parties and their allies are not in confidence right now. They are being given different instructions. Please comment on this first and then we will come to the political points of this amendment.

Speaker 2: First of all, it is clear that the Supreme Court of Pakistan is overburdened. And for this, we should make a constitution that includes democracy and all political parties including PTI. Malana Fazl-ul-Rehman supported this. So I think the government should have taken this to openness. And secondly, there should have been a parliamentary role in the appointment of judges and the process of elevation. So these two things were so clear in this matter that there was a consensus in the whole country that we should improve the more than 60,000 pendency in the Supreme Court. And the concept of the Constitutional Court in the 70 countries of the world, in which there is interpretation of law, enforcement of fundamental rights, inter-government issues. They have kept one special for them so that the common man of Pakistan does not get affected by all these things. So if these two things were very clear, then the government, its allied parties and the opposition should have taken it in confidence. And this is what the opposition parties have expressed. This debate should have been initiated two months ago. Its pros and cons should have come out. And after that, a decision would have come. Now, all these amendments that have come, they definitely have far-reaching consequences. But only on the basis that you did not share at the right time. A political setback has come to the government from that. But on the other hand, you see that despite all this, they are saying that the government's process was not right. But principally, everything is agreed that the Constitutional Court should be made in Pakistan. Or after that, it is necessary to strengthen the process of elevation of judges and the oversight of the Parliament, which came under the original 18th Constitution Amendment. So if two things are seen clearly, then maybe one thing has come in time. But if the government has put it in the process, in the consultation, and the minimum agenda is that all political parties or parliamentarians should be brought over it. So I think that this amendment, which is 26, will come. Now the second thing is that is there legislative competency of the Parliament? Absolutely, there is legislative competency of the Parliament, which is given under Article 249. There are only two restrictions. Either the territorial jurisdiction of the provinces, or you cannot work against any Islamic injunction. And all the memes that have come so far, from 1973 to today, 25 have come in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. No one has ever been told about Naleph or Ultra Virus. The second thing is that is the justice system of Pakistan, or the system of governance, or the judicial system, is there room for improvement? Absolutely, there is a lot. And if this work has been done in the Supreme Court through the Constitutional Court, then it should also go into the province. And in the same way, major reforms should be made in the Supreme Court, High Courts, Civil Courts, and District Courts. So that the cases that have been increasing in Pakistan for years, and your dispensation of justice system has slowed down, there is a lot of backlog in it. Or it is not fully in the public trust. So just saying to the extent of the Supreme Court, and being convinced of it. I think then those specific things will go on, and maybe its acceptability will be less. The government needs an overall package to address everything.

Speaker 1: There are two big challenges in front of the government right now. One is to get approval from the Parliament. That is, along with the allies, you will have to take the opposition on board. Even if the government fulfills that challenge, how much time will it take to implement it? As soon as it is implemented, will we see a big change? Today, our judicial system is at number 130 in the world. How much better will it be in the next four to six months?

Speaker 2: Your judicial system is 30 out of 140. Your governance, contract compliance, commercial, is at 156 out of 176. Your police is at 107 out of 126. After that, your outdated system, the 1898 Criminal Procedure Code, the 1908 Civil Procedure Code. And after that, you have so many complexes in it that people have been living their lives for years. They don't get justice. These are all things that need to be addressed. As far as the effect is concerned, the day the Parliament of Pakistan passes the law, and after that, the Act of Parliament is formed, and it is notified by Gazan, from that same day, its implementation starts. And if the law says that it has a retrospective effect, then it will have a retrospective effect. And if the law says that its image has a prospective effect, then it will have a prospective effect. So it is not that it will take time. If both of these things are passed, then it will be the law of the land. The constitution will be a part of Pakistan. And all the institutions of Pakistan, including the Supreme Court, or your governments, are bound to ban the constitution of Pakistan. Because Article 5 of the constitution demands that your religion should be with the state of Pakistan and with the constitution of Pakistan.

Speaker 1: Okay. Now Hafiz, the 60,000 cases that are pending in the Supreme Court, how quickly will these cases be heard through this constitutional amendment? How quickly will they reach their conclusion? And if we talk percentage-wise or number-wise, how much will it be reduced? Will we see it coming down to 60,000 to 30,000 in 6-10 months through this amendment?

Speaker 2: Arbaaz, you will see a major shift in this. Because when the Supreme Court addresses political, constitutional and political parties, because not a single judge sits in the Supreme Court, but three benches, and then we say, no, make it larger. Then we say, make it a full court. Then we say, no, make longer hearings. So I think that when the work of the Supreme Court comes exclusively to the criminal justice or civil justice system, then there will be a significant reduction in this pendency. And for this, it is important that we address these issues from the Supreme Court to the district courts. There are only 60,000 cases in the Supreme Court. The remaining 24,000,000 are in the High Court and District Courts. And the real problem in Pakistan starts with the District Courts. So this should be trickled down. Not only should investment be made in the justice sector, law enforcement agencies should be improved, but outdated laws should be changed and genuinely improved in the justice system of Pakistan, which has reached the lowest in South Asia. Nepal is higher than us, Bhutan is higher than us, India is ahead of us, Bangladesh is ahead of us. So this is a matter of concern, which our parliamentarians, judiciary and the actual stakeholders of Pakistan should be concerned about.