145 declared all on a sudden as conflicting only because the text of the provision is similar verbatim with the provision regime. The that was submission devised of by the a martial learned law Attorney General contains exactly this missing perspective. He is very much aware that repealed article 96 is the exact resemblance of the martial law provision, but his over emphasis on this point is making his vision blurred to see unequivocally clearly approved that by article the 96 Fifth has been Amendment Judgment considering this provision a relatively far better safeguard for the independence of the higher judiciary and related constitutional posts. In Asma Jilani V. The Government of Punjab, PLD 1972 SC 139, Hamoodur Rahman, CJ. though declared all Martial Law Regulations, Martial Law Proclamations and Orders illegal, the court approved the views taken in the case of The Attorney General of the Republic V. Mustafa Ibrahim, 1964 CLR 195 observing that ‘if it can be shown that it was enacted only in order to avoid consequences which could not otherwise