01-28-2007, 11:46 PM
Dr. Tariq Rahman recently in his article emphasis why it was so important that all laws which cause uncertainty, frustration amongst the people and humanity are not reviewed. This is what the great Honourable Mr. Justice Sardar Iqbal the first Ombudsman Pakistan said. He stated that he was not to see what worth a few lines written on a piece of paper in the name of law are but as an Ombudsman he was to see if such a written piece of paper was worth suitable and sustainable in todayâs developed civilized world.
There are many Laws in our beloved country which need to be reviewed and redrafted consistent to todayâs realities but unfortunate fact is the bureaucracy and vested interest for many obvious interests is not in favour of it. The reason for this refusal is well known to the educated masses.
Due to my hardly 5% existing eye sight I am not in a position to give exact timing, exact references etc yet I do remember it was about 4-5 years back when the Pakistan law Commission seeked public proposals for any amendment or reviews of existing laws. I do not remember what exactly were the wording of this public notice or the press release. As a conscience civic minded person I submitted a few proposals.
The first one was that some of the provisions in the Foreign Exchange Rules/Regulations were such which no where in any civilized country existed, were impracticable and in fact no one was acting on those provisions, as such why not to change those. According to those provisions as an Overseas Pakistani then working abroad I could not withdraw cash say Rs. 5,280 from my Bank Account in Karachi asking my friend to withdraw and book my Karachi-Lahore railway or PIA tickets. According to law if I did that it fetched fine and imprisonment. I needed to get an âInvoiceâ from Rthe ailways/PIA, send it to the State Bank for approval which may take 3-6 months SBP to give me response. With that approval of SBP then I needed to send cheque to Railways/PIA for issuance of tickets. I am sure had my friend gone to Railways/PIA asking for an âInvoiceâ he would had been sent to âGidd Bandarâ.
The second Overseas Pakistanis are directed to invest in Pakistan. When new shares are floated separate special share application forms are printed for them. Banks abroad are nominated by paying them heavy service charges to receive share applications, money is received in foreign local currency, in the form separate foreign and Pakistan address with passport details are taken. On allotment the share certificates are sent to them abroad. But after all of it, under a procedure prescribed both by SECP and SBP all communications with these overseas Pakistan shareholder is required to be made at their Pakistan local address where these people are not available. This procedures has âdeliberatelyâ been prescribed eg to deprive the OPs from timely within validity availing of Letters of Rights etc.
About 8 years back I took up this matter with the Federal Ombudsman that addressing a person knowing to be living in Karachi at Peshawar is of no sense on the ground that he did his LKG in Peshawar. SECP agreed with the Ombudsman to amend it. A draft of revised rule was sent to me drafting of which still was defective. I corrected it and sent back to SECP. 4-6 years whenever I enquired progress SECP told me the matter was under progress. After about 4-5 years âprogressâ I was finally conveyed that the share floating companies were not agreeing to review the unjust procedure hence nothing can be done. As a monitoring agency established also to look after the interest of the public is it that it should care more for the wishes of the companies or should it hear the logic and sense? On seeking public proposals I requested the Pakistan law Commission for a review of this unjust rule.
Third I found different types of pre-printed Wakalatnamas available in stationery shops. All of these were drafted in such a wayo that it only benefited and covered the Advocate and as if the litigant had no legal right. For example in one such wakalatnama a litigant after paying full fee in advance to his Advocate signs declaring that in case the case was decided exparte due to absence of his own advance, the litigant will not hold the advocate responsible.
Forth Presently particularly in Karachi flats etc are booked merely on application forms under which without even seeing the actual terms and condition the applicant signs having read and understood all the terms. Once he signs he finds himself under the grip of the developer due to different undisclosed rules. Though it is said there is a so-called âmodelâ agreement form prepared and sold by the Karachi Building Control Authority but not only that is defective in legal drafting (as I rthen received a copy through Sindh Ombudsman) but also is not practised anywhere. I twice offered Sindh Ombudsman that I spare some Rs. 20 to 25 thousand and his staff in own name may get one flat booked on strength of that so called âmodelâ agreement and not on application form. I proposed a âStandardâ Agreement covering rights and obligations of both the buyer and the developer. The present form of application/agreement only stipulates what the buyer is to do and nothing what the developer is to do. Having failed from all levels eg Sindh Ombudsman, Sindh Housing, Sindh Governor, Senators, Federal Ministers, MNAs, etc I approached with my proposal to the Pakistan Law Commission. I have struggled for 15 years on this subject at different levels without even any remotest progress â reason being my proposal hits the developers and protects the common man. I addressed dozens of so called NGOs in Karachi including Sheri for never to get any response.
Firth etc. It is now about 4 years. Not a single word of progress ever I received from the Commission. Once when I enquired I was told it was under consideration. But should these simple things which are in the interest of common man and the society in large take years over years particularly when the public proposals were seeked, it is a matter of conscious. The issues raised above do no affect the âeliteâ hence. If the issue pertain to an elite, early morning SRO can be issued reducing the duty to the nominal and as soon as the iron ingots are unloaded from the ship by afternonn a new SRO prescribing again old higher rates can, without taken any time, be issued.
There are many Laws in our beloved country which need to be reviewed and redrafted consistent to todayâs realities but unfortunate fact is the bureaucracy and vested interest for many obvious interests is not in favour of it. The reason for this refusal is well known to the educated masses.
Due to my hardly 5% existing eye sight I am not in a position to give exact timing, exact references etc yet I do remember it was about 4-5 years back when the Pakistan law Commission seeked public proposals for any amendment or reviews of existing laws. I do not remember what exactly were the wording of this public notice or the press release. As a conscience civic minded person I submitted a few proposals.
The first one was that some of the provisions in the Foreign Exchange Rules/Regulations were such which no where in any civilized country existed, were impracticable and in fact no one was acting on those provisions, as such why not to change those. According to those provisions as an Overseas Pakistani then working abroad I could not withdraw cash say Rs. 5,280 from my Bank Account in Karachi asking my friend to withdraw and book my Karachi-Lahore railway or PIA tickets. According to law if I did that it fetched fine and imprisonment. I needed to get an âInvoiceâ from Rthe ailways/PIA, send it to the State Bank for approval which may take 3-6 months SBP to give me response. With that approval of SBP then I needed to send cheque to Railways/PIA for issuance of tickets. I am sure had my friend gone to Railways/PIA asking for an âInvoiceâ he would had been sent to âGidd Bandarâ.
The second Overseas Pakistanis are directed to invest in Pakistan. When new shares are floated separate special share application forms are printed for them. Banks abroad are nominated by paying them heavy service charges to receive share applications, money is received in foreign local currency, in the form separate foreign and Pakistan address with passport details are taken. On allotment the share certificates are sent to them abroad. But after all of it, under a procedure prescribed both by SECP and SBP all communications with these overseas Pakistan shareholder is required to be made at their Pakistan local address where these people are not available. This procedures has âdeliberatelyâ been prescribed eg to deprive the OPs from timely within validity availing of Letters of Rights etc.
About 8 years back I took up this matter with the Federal Ombudsman that addressing a person knowing to be living in Karachi at Peshawar is of no sense on the ground that he did his LKG in Peshawar. SECP agreed with the Ombudsman to amend it. A draft of revised rule was sent to me drafting of which still was defective. I corrected it and sent back to SECP. 4-6 years whenever I enquired progress SECP told me the matter was under progress. After about 4-5 years âprogressâ I was finally conveyed that the share floating companies were not agreeing to review the unjust procedure hence nothing can be done. As a monitoring agency established also to look after the interest of the public is it that it should care more for the wishes of the companies or should it hear the logic and sense? On seeking public proposals I requested the Pakistan law Commission for a review of this unjust rule.
Third I found different types of pre-printed Wakalatnamas available in stationery shops. All of these were drafted in such a wayo that it only benefited and covered the Advocate and as if the litigant had no legal right. For example in one such wakalatnama a litigant after paying full fee in advance to his Advocate signs declaring that in case the case was decided exparte due to absence of his own advance, the litigant will not hold the advocate responsible.
Forth Presently particularly in Karachi flats etc are booked merely on application forms under which without even seeing the actual terms and condition the applicant signs having read and understood all the terms. Once he signs he finds himself under the grip of the developer due to different undisclosed rules. Though it is said there is a so-called âmodelâ agreement form prepared and sold by the Karachi Building Control Authority but not only that is defective in legal drafting (as I rthen received a copy through Sindh Ombudsman) but also is not practised anywhere. I twice offered Sindh Ombudsman that I spare some Rs. 20 to 25 thousand and his staff in own name may get one flat booked on strength of that so called âmodelâ agreement and not on application form. I proposed a âStandardâ Agreement covering rights and obligations of both the buyer and the developer. The present form of application/agreement only stipulates what the buyer is to do and nothing what the developer is to do. Having failed from all levels eg Sindh Ombudsman, Sindh Housing, Sindh Governor, Senators, Federal Ministers, MNAs, etc I approached with my proposal to the Pakistan Law Commission. I have struggled for 15 years on this subject at different levels without even any remotest progress â reason being my proposal hits the developers and protects the common man. I addressed dozens of so called NGOs in Karachi including Sheri for never to get any response.
Firth etc. It is now about 4 years. Not a single word of progress ever I received from the Commission. Once when I enquired I was told it was under consideration. But should these simple things which are in the interest of common man and the society in large take years over years particularly when the public proposals were seeked, it is a matter of conscious. The issues raised above do no affect the âeliteâ hence. If the issue pertain to an elite, early morning SRO can be issued reducing the duty to the nominal and as soon as the iron ingots are unloaded from the ship by afternonn a new SRO prescribing again old higher rates can, without taken any time, be issued.