Pakistan Case LawSOHAIL HAMEED, ADVOCATE Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Islamabad
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a constitutional petition filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution by a practicing advocate challenging the validity of the Enforcement of Shariah Act (Act X of 1991) on the ground that it violates his fundamental right to profess, practise, and propagate his religion under Article 20 of the Constitution. The core legal question is whether Section 3 of the Enforcement of Shariah Act 1991 infringes upon the petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 20 of the Constitution. The Court holds that the petition is misconceived, noting that the petitioner failed to point out any specific provision of the impugned Act that impedes his religious freedom, and that his grievance regarding interest-bearing loans from the House Building Finance Corporation does not stem from Section 3 of the Act. The petition is accordingly dismissed, laying down the principle that a legislative enactment cannot be struck down as violative of fundamental rights without demonstrating a direct and concrete infringement.
- Does the Enforcement of Shariah Act 1991 violate the fundamental right to profess, practise and propagate religion under Article 20 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Can a statute be declared void on the ground that it prevents a citizen from obtaining an interest-free loan from a financial corporation?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner is an advocate practising at Karachi and is a Muslim. He has challenged the validity of the Enforcement of Shariah Act (Act X of 1991 hereinafter referred to as the Shariah Act) through this petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution on the ground that the said Act violates his Fundamental Right under Article 20 of the Constitution. The said Article reads as follows:
"Subject to law, public order and morality,--
On enquiry as to how the Shariah Act impinges upon his aforementioned Fundamental Right he states that the Act does not permit him to profess, practise and propagate his religion. In this context, he has made special reference to section 3 of the Shariah Act which reads as follows:
"3. Supremacy of Shariah.--(1) The Shariah that is to say, the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah, shall be the Supreme Law of Pakistan.
' Provided that nothing contained herein shall affect the rights of the non-Muslims guaranteed by or under the Constitution."
When asked to specifically point out how this section will disable him from professing, practising and propagating his religion he is unable to cite specific instance apart from alleging that he will not be able to obtain a loan from the House Building Finance Corporation without insuring the liability of paying interest on the amount of the loan. It is to be noticed that the competence of the House Building Finance Corporation to charge interest on a loan advanced by it does not flow from section 3, ibid; consequently, this section cannot be declared void on the ground that it does not enable the petitioner to obtain an interest-free loan from the said Corporation. Apart from the above, the petitioner has not been able to refer to any provision of the Act which would stand in his way from practising, professing or propagating his religion. In the circumstances the Act does not on the face of it violate his Fundamental Right as guaranteed by Article 20 of the Constitution. This petition is clearly misconceived and is hereby dismissed.
Judges on this bench
- Saad Saood Jan2,559 judgments
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui1,222 judgments