PRE-DRAFTING REQUISITES OF A BILL
This stage is the soul of legislative drafting and provides a cemented
base over which the whole superstructure is built up. For a legislator, a
Bill has to be drafted on his thoughts and policy by a legislative drafter
and legislator's thoughts have to attain the form of words in black and
white in the form of a Bill and then it becomes his mission to get the Bill
passed. Legislative drafting may be a child's play if the following
enumerated elements are ignored while preparing a piece of
legislation. Ignorance of these essentials will result into a mere piece of
writing just as writing an essay or editorial in a newspaper which would
not in my view be at all legislative drafting. This also explains the
difference between a Government/Parliamentary Drafter and a Private
Drafter of any consultancy service or an autonomous organization who
has to obey his chain of command in reducing their thoughts and
whims into words without caring for the pre-requisites enumerated
below.
2. This Chapter would also clear misconception of those who
assume that whenever a legislative drafter is asked to draft a Bill, he is
supposed to start drafting at once by following the scheme of Bill i.e.
long title, enacting formula, preamble, short title, denitions, enacting
provisions and so on and so forth. Lord Thring who became the rst
Head of the Ofce of the Parliamentary Counsel in London and served
at this post from 1869 till 1886 was well aware of this desire of a
legislator and he summed up his wisdom in a very simple and terse
manner by saying:
“A Bill is made to pass as razors are made to sell.”
3. This epithetical saying by Lord Thring paved my way for

expounding the pre-drafting requisites of a Bill which are enumerated
as below:-
(1) The foremost is the Constitutionality of the Bill. It is
the duty of a legislative drafter to ensure that the contents of
the Bill are not inconsistent or ultra varies the provisions of the
Constitution. A drafter has to keep in his mind the
fundamental rights enshrined in Constitution of Pakistan
wherein Article 8 states that laws inconsistent with or in
derogation of fundamental rights shall be void. Certain articles
like Article 74 are also to be taken into account which is
reproduced as below:
“74. Federal Government's consent required for
nancial measures.— A Money Bill, or a Bill or
amendment which if enacted and brought into operation
would involve expenditure from the Federal Consolidated
Fund or withdrawal from the Public Account of the
Federation or affect the coinage or currency of Pakistan or the
constitution or functions of the State Bank of Pakistan shall
not be introduced or moved in Parliament except by or with
the consent of the Federal Government”.
A legislative drafter has to have a mastery over the legislative
subjects provided in the Legislative List of the Constitution
which would determine the legislative competence of
Parliament or a Provincial Assembly to legislate upon a
particular subject of legislation. Once there was a debate that
Parliament can enact on the subjects provided in the principles
of policy of the Constitution because to ensure observance of
the principles of policy is the duty of State, therefore,
Parliament has the legislative competence in those matters to
legislate for whole of Pakistan. The denition of “State”

provided in Article 7 of the Constitution resolved the matter
which includes inter alia not only Parliament but Provincial
Assemblies as well and the demarcation of legislative
competence of a Provincial Assembly and Parliament is
provided in the Legislative List. So the determining factor is
the Legislative List and not the fact that observance of
principles of policy have to be ensured by State so should be
legislated upon by Parliament for whole of Pakistan. Same
misconception is regarding the Fundamental Rights
enshrined in the Constitution that since State has to enforce
these rights so on the contents of these rights, Parliament can
legislate for the whole of Pakistan. The Constitution has to be
construed like any other document by reading it as a whole and
giving to every segment a meaning consistent with the other
provisions of the Constitution.
(2) A legislative drafter has to have knowledge of the
Pakistan Code which contains all Pakistan Laws enacted by
Parliament. The purpose of knowing Pakistan Code is to avoid
preparing a Bill on the laws which already exist in Pakistan but
because of their non-implementation, they wash out from the
memory or remain in hibernation. At the same time, if such a
Bill is not identical with the already existing law and only some
of its provisions are in conict with the already existing law; it
results in impracticability of implementation and also leads to
litigation in courts. Not only existing laws, but pending
legislation is also to be kept in mind. Like the repealed
Companies Ordinance, 1984 has been referred in a bundle of
laws and at the time when Companies Act, 2017 was passed, it
was drafter's duty to have it substituted for the expression of
Companies Ordinance 1984 used in the Bills before
Parliament. Furthermore, one should be very careful and not

overambitious for this type of substitution because there is
many a slip between the cup and the lip. It is very dangerous to
presume that Companies Bill, 2017 is likely to pass within no
time so let's substitute the expression Companies Act 2017 for
the expression Companies Ordinance 1984 in a Bill under
discussion in Parliament. In addition to this, a legislative
drafter must keep in mind an uncommenced legislation
waiting for notication by the Government because
notication can be issued any time to bring that law into force
thus having an impact on a relevant Bill under discussion.
Hence the contingency of a relevant uncommenced legislation
shall also be kept in mind. A cardinal principle of legislative
drafting is that statute shall be read as a whole and not in
piecemeal but a legislative drafter has to go miles further to this
principle to ensure that compendium of statutes when read as
a whole must supplement and complement each other rather
than being destructive, derogatory and disrespectful to each
other. When a drafter is cognizant of the fact that a law already
exists on a particular subject on which he is drafting a Bill, he
can avoid unnecessary use of non obstante clauses and can
suitably draft overriding provisions. The knowledge of
legislative drafter of existing laws also rules out the possibility
of friction among those agencies or authorities who have to
implement the laws when same provisions in different laws
have to be implemented by different agencies or authorities.
(3) General Clauses Act, 1897, commonly known as
Interpretation Act in world jurisdictions, is legislative drafter's
dictionary. The command over the General Clauses Act saves a
drafter from reproducing the provisions in a Bill which are
already present in the General Clauses Act. Despite this, it has
become a trend to write down the effects of repeal in a Bill

which is mere reproduction of General Clauses Act but the
argument given is that it saves the reader from reverting to
General Clauses Act for reading the effects of repeal. For
instance, clause (a) of section 6 of the General Clause Act, 1897
puts a bar on the revival of repealed enactment if the
enactment repealing is repealed itself. The distinctive
judgments of the Lahore High Court and the Sindh High Court
on the issue as to whether Industrial Relations Act, 1969 holds
the eld or Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002, has revived
after the repeal of Industrial Relations Act, 2008 on the 30th
April, 2010 (the date of sunset clause given in the Act of 2008),
was resolved by Supreme Court and before Supreme Court By
Law Division on the basis of section 6 of General Clauses Act to
conclude that the repeal of Industrial Relations Act, 2008 by
sunset clause does not revive the Industrial Relations
Ordinance, 2002, or the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
(4) Updated knowledge of case law or judicial legislation
is very important for a legislative drafter who always has to
keep in mind how his drafted provisions will be interpreted by
Courts on the touchstone of judicial interpretations already
given by them to various expressions and provisions. The
judiciary has always claimed that it has the rights to interpret
the provisions of Constitution even if it is a provision seeking to
oust its own jurisdiction. A legislative drafter must take into
consideration the ambiguities revealed by judicial decisions on
similar provisions so that while drafting a Bill these
ambiguities are removed. If certain expression has been
interpreted by Courts and the drafter intends not to use that
expression within the meaning interpreted by Courts then he
should nd its suitable alternative but not at the cost of clarity
and the purpose desired to be achieved.

(5) Rules of Business, 1973 are Constitutional rules and
have to be adhered to for uniform, smooth and efcient
working of the Government. The violation of these rules is a
serious violation and ignorance of these rules on the part of
legislative drafter is felt when an enactment comes in conict
with these Constitutional rules which leads to distinctive
implementation of laws administered by different
departments. In linkage of Rules of Business, 1973 with the
drafting of a Bill, I refer to one common misconception about
the Rules of Business of the Federal Government that whatever
subject is present in Schedule-II to the Rules of Business, it is a
Federal subject because Rules of Business are of Federal
Government and further that since the subject is Federal so it
can be legislated upon by Parliament for whole of Pakistan and
Federal Government can propose legislation on it to the extent
of whole of Pakistan. In this regard it is stated that it is a glaring
misconception because legislative competence is determined
by Federal Legislative List contained in Fourth Schedule to the
Constitution of Pakistan and not by Rules of Business. Rules of
Business, 1973 demarcates and divides subjects among
different Divisions and whether legislation on those subjects
would extent to Islamabad Capital Territory or whole of
Pakistan, it can only be determined by the Legislative List of
the Constitution.
(6) A legislative drafter has to have knowledge of
International Conventions, Treaties, Protocols,
Memorandums of Understanding, etc. to which
Pakistan is a signatory so that while drafting a provision
nothing goes against the covenant which Pakistan has singed
or ratied at the International level. Pakistan is a dualistic
State where the International covenants are entered into by the

Government and thereafter they have to be translated into the
domestic legislation by Acts of Parliament, therefore, a
legislative drafter has to keep himself abreast of the
I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n s , T r e a t i e s , P r o t o c o l s ,
Memorandums of Understanding, etc. to which Pakistan is a
signatory.
(7) Principles of statutory interpretation and legislative
drafting are hand and glove with each other. A legislative
drafter should have mastery over rules of statutory
interpretation, the principles of statutory interpretation
evolved through case law and the legal maxims understood
and practised world over. His Bill after becoming an Act will be
read by lawyers, students of law, court ofcers, consumers,
stakeholders, a layman, judges of subordinate and superior
judiciary, International Organizations, NGOs, analysts, media
persons, etc. Thus he has to keep in mind that his legislative
product will be read by different strata of society- from
rudimentary level of law students to the level of legal stalwarts
and all those whose job is to nd loopholes and intentionally
misunderstand and twist the law in their favour.
4. When all the above enumerated elements and requisites have
been taken into account, only then a legislative drafter shall dare to
commence the drafting of a Bill on a particular subject. However, some
practical difculties are faced by legislative drafters world over because
my study of different books and manuals of legislative drafting written
by authors of different jurisdictions shows that legislation all over the
world is a hasty process and enough time is not given to a legislative
drafter whether it be a Government Bill or a Private Member Bill.