Apex court’s staff: SC orders registrar to provide info within 7 days under RTI Act

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday ordered its registrar to provide information related to apex court’s staff – under the Right to Information (RTI) Act – to a petitioner within seven days.

A three-member judge bench headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa comprising Justice Aminuddin and Justice Athar Minallah announced its reserved verdict against an order of Islamabad High Court (IHC). Justice Athar wrote additional note.

The petitioner Mukhtar Ahmed Ali had sought information about total sanctioned strength of the SC, vacancies, female staff, persons with disabilities, number of transgender, and the detail of regular and daily wagers in the apex court.

Amendments to NAO: SC urged to review its judgment

The court while agreeing with the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan stated that the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 clearly does not apply to the Supreme Court of Pakistan, adding “therefore, the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the commission was not maintainable and to such extent the Single Judge of the Islamabad High Court had correctly determined the matter”.

The AGP had submitted before the court that the Act applies only to public bodies as defined in its section 2(ix) and this definition does not include the Supreme Court.

He had further stated that though the Act is applicable to ‘court, tribunal, commission or board under the federal law’, the Supreme Court is established under the constitution, and not under a federal law, nor is the Supreme Court a public body of the Federal Government to which the Act does apply. “Therefore, the Act was not applicable and the Commission did not have jurisdiction with regard to the SC.”

However, the judgment said the SC is not excluded from the purview of Article 19A of the Constitution, and information of ‘public importance’ can be sought there under. It now needs consideration as to what constitutes public importance. The phrase ‘public importance’ is mentioned in a number of places in the Constitution, but it does not define it.

It said that Access to Information laws are also taking on a new meaning - of efficient administration of government, as a contributor to economic growth and a catalyst for the development of information industries.

The judgment stated that the high standards were set in early Islam and those governing had to provide information. The second Caliph Hazrat Umar bin Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) was questioned about the quantity of material used in the making of his shirt; he did not object to being questioned and told his son, Abdullah bin Umar, to explain, who said that in view of his father’s large size, extra material which was used to make his shirt was given by him.

Transparency brings with it the added benefit of introspection, which benefits institutions by promoting self-accountability. Article 19A stipulates that information be provided subject to regulation and reasonable restrictions imposed by law.

However, there is no law which attends to the SC in this regard nor has the SC itself made any regulations. Needless to state that if a law is enacted and/or regulations made, requests for information would be attended to in accordance therewith and in accordance with Article 19A.

Article 19A envisages the placing of reasonable restrictions on the provision of information, but refusing to provide information is to be justified by the person, authority or institution withholding it.

In the instant case, there is no reason why the information sought by the petitioner should not be provided, nor can the provision of such information be categorized as being contrary to the public interest. Consequently, the information sought by the petitioner should have been provided to him.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023