ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has authenticated the government’s notification banning the import of books and other items from India and Israel and annulled all the directions issued by the Lahore High Court (LHC).
A three-member bench, headed by Justice Aamir Farooq, issued a judgment on an appeal filed by Ministry of Commerce against the LHC decision.
Justice Ali Baqar Najafi and Justice Rozi Khan Bareech were the two other members of the bench.
The Lahore High Court had earlier ruled that “knowledge cannot be restricted” and directed the government to review the import ban against which the Ministry of Commerce had filed an appeal with the Federal Constitutional Court.
After accepting the appeal, the court set aside the Lahore High Court decision and declared as valid the government notification banning the import of books and other items from India and Israel and annulled all directions issued by the Lahore High Court.
It is pertinent to mention that the federal government had banned all trade with India in 2019 after the revocation of the special status of Indian-administered Kashmir (Article 370).
On Friday, the Federal Constitutional Court released a 21-page judgment, authored by Justice Aamir Farooq, observing that matters of foreign policy and national security fell exclusively within the domain of the executive (government), and the judiciary could not interfere in such sensitive matters.
Justice Ali Baqar Najafi also wrote an additional note spanning five pages.
The court held that it was the discretionary authority of the government to decide which countries it wished to maintain trade relations with and which it did not. If the judiciary issues orders regarding trade, it would be considered an overreach of authority.
The court also struck down the Lahore High Court’s direction to the federal government to appoint an officer for review, terming it a suo motu action, and held that the High Court had no authority to initiate such proceedings on its own.
The court acknowledged that the “right to read” under Article 9 of the Constitution was a fundamental human right and part of the right to life. However, it clarified that this right was subject to restrictions imposed under national laws and foreign policy. It further noted that the right to free education under Article 25-A was limited to school and college levels.
The court observed that the Constitution was an evolving document that could interpret new rights over time, but national interest took precedence.
So, right to read, we hold, is embedded within our Constitution, the court ruled adding that for the meaningful fulfillment of the right to life guaranteed under Article 9, it was essential that individuals were enabled to read; and by “read,” to be educated.
The court noted that this right bore an intrinsic nexus with life itself, remained anchored in our constitutional principles, and was necessary for the preservation of our societal values.
The court reiterated that the federal government’s foreign policy could not be examined in judicial review by any court and its review or reconsideration was the sole prerogative of the executive.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Lahore High Court, in our view, erred in law in issuing directions to the federal government in terms as contained in paragraphs (c) to (e) of the impugned judgment and the same are accordingly set aside” the judgment concluded.
Meanwhile, in his additional note, Justice Ali Baqar Najafi declared that alongside the “right to read,” the “right to write” is also an essential fundamental right. He emphasized that acquisition of knowledge and its expression were two sides of the same coin.
Referring to Islamic teachings and Quranic injunctions, he wrote that the first revelation, “Iqra” (Read), addressed humanity, and through the pen, God taught what humans did not know. Reading and writing are interconnected.
He also cited the poetry of Allama Iqbal to highlight the importance of selfhood and human dignity, stating that reading and writing are the only means to free individuals from outdated ideas and the chains of intellectual slavery. Knowledge, he said, is the power that enables a person to recognize their identity and the philosophy of selfhood.
He noted that in today’s digital age, imposing a complete restriction on information was nearly impossible, as alternative online sources were always available. He stressed that instead of creating barriers to access information, efforts should be made to intellectually strengthen the nation.
The right to write, he added, allows citizens to actively participate in the democratic process and express their opinions. He emphasized that to meet the challenges of the modern era, the nation must be mentally and intellectually empowered.
He concluded his note by stating that a well-educated and confident society was the true strength of a country, where citizens have full freedom to express their thoughts in writing.
