Religious Persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Recommend UsEmail this PagePersecution News RSS Blog
Introduction & Updates
<< ... Worldwide ... >>
Monthly Newsreports
Annual Newsreports
Media Reports
Press Releases
Facts & Figures
Individual Case Reports
Pakistan and Ahmadis
Critical Analysis/Archives
Persecution - In Pictures
United Nations, HCHR
Amnesty International
US States Department
Urdu Section
Feedback/Site Tools
Related Links

Home Critical Analysis/Archives ERROR AT THE APEX
On The Way To Supreme Court
Challenge on Constitutional Grounds
The Ordinance XX of 1984, was in conflict with the fundamental right. Soon after the promulgation of the ordinance it was also challenged under Constitutional jurisdiction in the High Court. Two such petitions were filed in the Lahore High Court.
Muhammad Aslam
Federation of Pakistan
One Mohammad Aslam of district Kasoor challenged the Ordinance in Writ jurisdiction and contended that:
The ordinance XX was in violation of the Constitution. The power of the President was subject to the same restrictions and limitations as the pow-ers of the parliament to enact laws. Since the parlia-ment could not make a law in violation of funda-mental rights, the president also could not promul-gate an ordinance in violation of fundamental rights. The Ordinance prohibits the petitioners to profess and practice their religion, which enjoins daily prayers in a mosque. The congregation is called by Azan calling the worshipers to join in congregation. The Ordinance prohibits azan as well. This was in violation of fundamental right guaranteed by Article 20 of the Constitution. The petitioner also relied on Article 227(3) of Pakistan Constitution, which article had been incorporated even in the provisional Constitution order issued by the Martial Law Administrator. The petitioner also contended that the ordinance violated the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights to which Pakistan was signatory. It was also contended that the Ordinance was discriminatory in nature and further that it criminalized and punished Islamic practices by calling them un-Islamic. It was also contended that the Ordinance was tainted with malice of the Martial Law Administrator which had found expression in his public speeches.’ [1]
Previous - > On The Way To Supreme Court Error at The Apex - Table of Contents Top of Page Next - > 4.2 Challenge On Constitutional Grounds - Mujeeb ur Rahman Dard Vs Pakistan