Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has hinted at concluding proceedings of petitions difficult the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 today (Tuesday), saying too many circumstances are pending within the apex court docket.
The remarks come as the complete court docket bench — headed by CJP Isa and comprising 14 judges of the Supreme Court — resumed listening to petitions difficult the law in search of to curtail CJP’s discretionary powers.
The proceedings of the case are being broadcast dwell by state-run PTV.
The full court docket bench consists of CJP Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A. Malik, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed and Justice Musarrat Hilali.
At the final listening to, the apex court docket’s full court docket had sought replies from all events by September 25.
At the outset of the listening to, CJP Isa stated the apex court docket would attempt to conclude hearings of the case today (Tuesday).
The CJP stated many circumstances are already pending within the Supreme Court and the court docket can not spend an excessive amount of time on one case.
He additionally directed the petitioner’s counsel to finish his arguments in 10 minutes.
CJP Isa stated the powers of the chief justice will not be being curtailed via this laws reasonably they’re being devolved among the many judges.
He stated the affect of this law will likely be significantly on the chief justice and the 2 senior judges.
‘Parliament bulldozed judiciary’s independence’
Presenting his arguments, the petitioner’s lawyer Ikram Chaudhry stated parliament bulldozed the independence of the judiciary via the follow Act.
“Parliament tried to breach jurisdiction through the Act,” he added.
Lawyer Chaudhry additionally pointed that it was additionally crucial to evaluate the scenario of the parliament at the time it handed the act.
“Will you base your arguments on newspaper reports?” the CJP stated.
To this, the lawyer stated they didn’t have report of parliament’s proceedings.
“Did you request the speaker in writing to provide you with the record of the proceedings?” the CJP inquired.
CJP Isa additionally informed the counsel to keep away from political dialogue within the court docket after the latter learn out the assertion of former prime minister earlier than the bench.
“Don’t do politics here, [forum of] media is available. Go and do politics there,” the CJP remarked.
The CJP stated some folks believed that Supreme Court and parliament have come nose to nose over this law.
“I will not use the word war,” the CJP remarked.
The CJP stated the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act has now turn into a law and added that the controversy shouldn’t be held on whether or not parliament might have enacted laws or not.
“Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act is against the Constitution or not, tell me,” CJP requested the counsel.
Responding to the lawyer’s argument that the apex ocurt has powers to strike down any laws, the CJP Isa stated the Supreme Court declared within the 21st Amendment that it could possibly additionally evaluate the constitutional modification.
“The independence of judiciary is only for courts to defend?” the CJP requested.
“If parliament makes a law to give priority to widows’ cases [then] that too will affect the independence of the judiciary?” the CJP added.
‘Act makes entry to justice straightforward’
After lawyer Chaudhry accomplished his arguments, one other petitioner’s counsel Hasan Irfan took the podium.
He informed the bench that the Constitution made the usage of Article 184 (3) obligatory on the Supreme Court.
At which, the CJP stated: “You are saying that the not only Chief Justice has the power of Article 184-3, but the entire Supreme Court can exercise it?”
Justice Ahsan stated Article 191 empowers the Supreme Court to make its personal guidelines of process.
“The Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act has devolved the powers of the chief justice to a committee of judges,” Justice Ahsan remarked.
He additional stated the apex court docket itself can divide its powers into one or as many judges.
“The powers of the Supreme Court are sacred,” Justice Ahsan remarked.
Justice Minallah stated the Act made entry to justice straightforward. “[…] does the parliament not have the powers to bring transparency in the internal affairs of the Supreme Court?” requested Justice Minallah.
Justice Minallah additional inquired from the counsel as to how the basic rights pertaining to entry to justice of the folks have been affected by the Act.
Lawyer Irfan requested whether or not the chief justice and the judges’ committee have the discretionary authority to take discover of the violation of his rights.
Responding to this, Justice Minallah requested whether or not the correct to entry justice was affected when the suo moto powers rested with the chief justice.
“When martial law is imposed, everyone surrenders their weapons. There are many pictures [of judges] in this room who forgot their oath after the imposition of martial law,” CJP Isa remarked.
Case background
On April 13, an eight-member bench of the Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the law, which offers with the powers of the highest choose in issues of public curiosity and seeks to restrict the suo moto powers of the chief justice of Pakistan.
During the earlier listening to in June, the similarities between the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023 — which pertains to the correct of attraction in suo motu circumstances — and the SC Practice and Procedure Act have been mentioned with Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan saying that parliament might look into “harmonising” the 2 legal guidelines.
The then-CJP Umar Ata Bandial— whereas he welcomed the proposal — stated that the federal authorities ought to take the highest court docket into consideration when making any laws associated to the judiciary.
Following CJP Isa’s elevation because the nation’s prime choose, the petition was fastened for listening to on the primary day of his tenure. The prime choose had constituted a full court docket to listen to the pleas difficult the law and was televised making it the primary time within the nation’s judicial historical past, the Supreme Court allowed dwell telecast of proceedings on the petitions difficult the contentious law.
During the day-long listening to, a lot of queries have been raised by totally different members of the bench and the legal professional basic and attorneys sought time to submit their responses.
To this impact, the court docket directed the attorneys to submit their responses by September 25 and adjourned the listening to until October 3.
Furthermore, to proceed the functioning of the Supreme Court, CJP Isa constituted a three-member committee — comprising himself, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Ijazul Ahsan — to assign circumstances and type benches.
The law
The law gave the facility of taking sou motu discover to a three-member committee comprising senior judges together with the chief justice. It additional aimed to have clear proceedings within the apex court docket and consists of the correct to attraction.
Regarding the structure of benches, the Act said that each trigger, matter or attraction earlier than the apex court docket could be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by a committee comprising the CJP and the 2 senior-most judges.
It added that the selections of the committee could be taken by a majority.
Regarding exercising the apex court docket’s authentic jurisdiction, the Act stated that any matter invoking the usage of Article 184(3) would first be positioned earlier than the committee.
On issues the place the interpretation of the Constitution is required, the Act stated the committee would compose a bench comprising at least 5 apex court docket judges.
About appeals for any verdict by an apex court docket bench that exercised Article 184(3)‘s jurisdiction, the Act said that the appeal would lie within 30 days of the bench’s order to a bigger SC bench. It added that the attraction could be fastened for listening to inside a interval not exceeding 14 days.
It added that this proper of attraction would additionally lengthen retrospectively to these aggrieved individuals towards whom an order was made underneath Article 184(3) previous to the graduation of the SC (Practice and Procedure), Act 2023, on the situation that the attraction was filed inside 30 days of the Act’s graduation.
The Act moreover stated {that a} social gathering would have the correct to nominate its counsel of selection for submitting a evaluate software underneath Article 188 of the Constitution.
Furthermore, it states that an software pleading urgency or in search of interim aid, filed in a trigger, attraction or matter, shall be fastened for listening to inside 14 days from the date of its submitting.