FCC upholds ban on Indian, Israeli books

Upholding the government decision regarding the ban on imports of books from India and Israel, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has held that the right to read is not absolute and may be subject to restrictions as imposed by law, including those justified on grounds of foreign policy. The court also noted that the foreign policy of the federal government cannot be examined in judicial review by any court and its review or reconsideration is the sole prerogative of the executive. "We have recognised the right to read as flowing from the right to life under Article 9 of the Constitution, this right is not absolute but qualified. Article 9 itself expressly provides that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty "save in accordance with law". "In the present case, the law has taken its course. The Federal Government has acted within its domain of executive authority by regulating trade," says 21-page judgement authored by Justice Aamer Farooq while upholding the Statutory Regulatory Orders (SROs) Nos 927 and 928(I)/2019, issued by the federal government under its constitutional and statutory authority, reflecting considerations of foreign policy, national security, and sovereign discretion. Even though Lahore High Court had also upheld the validity of the SROs and declared them intra vires the Constitution and relevant statutory framework, it nonetheless issued certain directions to the federal government. However, the executive challenged those directions in the top court. The FCC judgement noted that the executive authority of the federation vests in the federal government and is exercised by the prime minister and the cabinet in the name of the president. "Under Article 97 of the Constitution, the Federation is empowered to exercise executive authority in respect of matters falling within the legislative competence of parliament. "To determine the extent of the Federation's executive power, it is therefore necessary to examine the scope of Parliament's lawmaking powers. At this stage, we take note of the ground relied upon by the Petitioners for imposing the impugned ban, namely considerations of national security and foreign policy. We refrain from examining the nature of Pakistan's relations with the said countries or the policy reasons underlying the adoption of such measures," says the judgement. The judgement further said that courts have consistently held, over the years, that it ought not to interfere in matters pertaining to national security and foreign policy.