The National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Law and Justice has postponed the deliberation of sizeable bills: the Legal Aid and Justice Authority (Amendment) Bill 2024 and the NAB (National Accountability Bureau) Amendment Bill 2024.
Legal Aid and Justice Authority (Amendment) Bill 2024
During the meeting, the Secretary of Law provided insights into the Legal Aid and Justice Authority (Amendment) Bill 2024. He defined that the authority started with installed to provide legal help and representation to the underprivileged and prone people. However, the authority has not become operational because of the absence of proper regulation. Committee member Hafeezuddin expressed concern, questioning why the authority cannot function if the law is not in place. He emphasized the importance of having data on individuals in prisons who lack legal representation, suggesting that records of such cases are crucial for addressing pending cases.
Azam Nazeer Tarar, the Federal Minister for Law, defended the established order of the Legal Aid and Justice Society, affirming its genuine intent to serve the general public. He requested time to enhance the invoice and advised against politicizing the Legal Aid Authority. His comments aimed to ensure that the authority efficiently carries out its role without political interference.
NAB (National Accountability Bureau) Amendment Bill 2024
Regarding the NAB Amendment Bill 2024, senior lawyer Latif Khosa argued in opposition to the proposed extension of NAB remands to forty days. He cautioned that such a provision should not be defended using the Law Minister. In response, Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar asked beyond regular time to check the bill before intending.
Dispute Over Reserved Seats
The consultation additionally noticed a heated exchange among the authorities. PTI (Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf) over the Supreme Court’s selection concerning reserved seats. The debate escalated into a war of words between Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar and PTI Chief Latif Khosa. He questioned whether the government intended to provoke further conflict by repeatedly seeking reviews of the decision.
Minister Tarar responded by indicating that reviews would continue and criticized the dismissal of members without hearing their perspectives. He suggested that the situation would persist in its current state.
The postponement of these bills reflects ongoing disagreements and the need for further deliberations to address the complexities of legal reforms and their implications for governance and justice.
