On August 10, 2021, the learned counsel for the Registrar, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Mr. Ch. Amir Rehman filed an Application before Pakistan Information Commission to withdraw its Order announced on July 12, 21.
The application brought to the fore following questions for the consideration of the commission:
- Under what provisions of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017, henceforth referred to as the “Act”, can this Commission review its own Order issued under Section 20 (e) of the Act?
- Can this Commission review its own Order in absence of any express provision in the Act conferring powers to review its own Orders”?
The commission held that if the assertion is that the Commission’s order is illegal and without jurisdiction, a remedy is available in the form of a Constitutional Petition before the higher judicial forums, but the Commission is not authorized to create remedies that are not explicitly provided for within its constituent Act. Reference is made to 2019 PCRLJ 318 (Muhammad Lehrasif v. The State and another), in which the Honourable Peshawar High Court (Abbottabad Bench) clearly held, at paragraph 7: “Like an appeal or revision, the power to review judgment or order is a creation of statute. Unless this power has been specifically conferred upon a Court through an explicit provision of law, the court can’t review its order/judgment. The Court has no inherent power to review its judgment or order even if the same is based on incorrect appreciation of evidence qua law”. When such power is not granted even to the higher judicial forums, this Commission cannot overstep its bounds as laid out in the 2017 Act. In fact, in PLD 1970 Supreme Court 1 (Hussain Bakhsh v. Settlement Commissioner, Rawalpindi and others), the Honourbale Supreme Court held: “The right to claim review of any decision of a Court of law, like the right to appeal, is a substantive right and not a mere matter of procedure”. When the Commission has not been authorized to even review its own orders, recalling/rescinding the same would be blatantly ultra vires the 2017 Act.
The commission held that whereas the Respondent’s counsel has made reference to the General Clauses Act, the power to recall/rescind an order has not been provided for by the legislature in the 2017 Act. Therefore, to infer such power from the General Clauses Act for itself would amount to the Commission exceeding the confines of its authority, in clear violation of the intention of the legislature.
The commission disposed of the application maintaining that the request contained therein falls outside the scope of powers vested in this Commission under the Right of Access to Information Act 2017.