Courts dismiss pleas against physical holding of CAIE examinations
ISLAMABAD/LAHORE/KARACHI: On Friday, the high courts dismissed separate petitions challenging holding in-person Cambridge examinations and seeking a switch to school-assessed grades.
Students had filed pleas in the Islamabad High Court, the Sindh High Court, and the Lahore High Court against the Cambridge Assessment International Education’s (CAIE) decision and the government’s approval to hold physical examinations the country.
IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah dismissed the petition after hearing arguments from both sides.
The judge offered to send the petitioners’ request to the National Command and Control Centre (NCOC) on Covid-19.
He added that it was not the courts’ job to interfere in the country’s “policy matters.” Justice Minallah noted that the court had not interfered in any policy decisions of the NCOC. He observed that the government could not issue any directive to CAIE in any case. The judge remarked that the government only provided services related to the CAIE examinations.
He asked the petitioner’s lawyer if he wanted the government to stop the CAIE from holding the exams. The lawyer replied that he was not asking for anything in the petition, which was not already a part of the CAIE policy.
He pointed out that the board had provided students with two options, and Saudi Arabia, Thailand, and India had opted for online examinations instead of physical. Justice Minallah said there were nine petitioners in the petition, and the rest of the students might have wanted to give in-person exams.
He added that only nine petitioners could not be representatives of thousands of students. A short order issued by the IHC read that the decision for what mode should be adopted to assess O and A level courses was a “policy matter.”
“Since the grievance is in the context of the crisis of Covid-19, therefore, the competent forum to consider and formulate the policy falls within the domain of respondent No. 3 i.e. NCOC,” it further read. “This court has already held that the decisions of the NCOC are binding and not justiciable by a judicial forum.”
It added that as the issue raised by the petitioners related to the government’s policy in tackling the Covid-19 pandemic, the court was “not the competent forum nor has the expertise to direct the respondents regarding what mode should be adopted relating to assessment of students.” The order stated that the petitioners would be at “liberty to file a representation” before the NCOC. It would then be expected to take decisions deemed appropriate in the circumstances.
The SHC also dismissed a similar plea filed against students’ physical presence in A and O levels examinations. A bench of the high court, headed by Justice Mohammed Ali Mazhar, issued a short order after hearing the arguments. The bench ruled that the examinations would be held as per schedule. However, it directed the respondents to ensure implementation of the SOPs during the examinations.
“We have upheld the NCOC decision of holding physical examination(s) in Pakistan in line with [the] notified schedule and also rejected the prayer for awarding school-assessed grades in lieu of physical examination(s),” read the short order.
During the proceedings, the deputy attorney general (DAG) told the court that the IHC had dismissed an identical petition. He added that it was a policy matter, and the NCOC had made the decision after consulting with all the stakeholders.
The DAG argued that there was no reason and justification to halt the exams. However, he added that issues related to SOPs could be discussed and examined. The lawyer representing the CAIE argued that the situation of Covid-19 was better in Karachi compared to Lahore.
He added that the CAIE would proceed as per schedule if not restrained by the court. “The students not willing to sit in the current exam session could avail another opportunity in October and November,” he added.
The LHC:
also dismissed a petition filed by students.“[The petitioners] could not point out any sort of discrimination since the respondents [the British Council and the CAIE] are undertaking examinations not just in Pakistan but in other parts of the world as well,” read an order authored by Justice Jawad Hassan of the LHC.
It added that the Punjab government had also issued the examination schedule. And no exemption was given to other students in the private and public sectors. “Even from analogical perspective, the prayer of the petitioners cannot find any favourable support.”
The order noted that the British Council had submitted standard operating procedures (SOPs) in writing, which it had conveyed to the students who would be taking the examinations.
“Perusal of the SOP(s) makes it clear that a strict criteria for the safety of the students is being ensured. Learned counsel for the petitioners have not been able to make out an exceptional case. Due to jurisdictional barrier and being policy decision. The apprehensions voiced by the petitioners to advocate cancellation of the examinations. Which have effectively been repelled and adequately been addressed by the respondents.”
