ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has issued notices to the Federal Government, political parties as well as the Pakistan Bar Council in the case against the judicial reforms bill, and adjourned the hearing.
The court also issued a notice to the Supreme Court Bar Association and the attorney general for Pakistan.
The chief justice also commented that an order will be issued shortly, adding if necessary, a judicial assistant will also be appointed.
Issuing notices issued to the parties concerned, the attorney general has been asked to assist. The federal government, AGP and political parties will be issued notices.
CJP Bandial observed that the court has utmost respect for parliament, remarking that the court wants to review the proposed Act.
The chief justice said the court will try to schedule the next hearing as soon as possible. The next hearing will be scheduled only after the availability of fellow judges, he observed.
The proposed act should be prevented from becoming a law until a decision in the case, petitioner’s lawyer Siddiqui said.
The Hasba Bill came in the form of a reference, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar noted, adding in that bill the governor was prevented from signing it.
The Law Ministry should be prevented from notifying the law till a decision, the lawyer contended.
Earlier today, an eight-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, started hearing a set of petitions against the SC (Practice & Procedure) Bill, 2023 passed by parliament and aimed at curtailing the top judge’s “unbridled” powers.
The bench has taken up pleas that were separately submitted by Mohammad Shafay Munir on Tuesday, and Raja Amir Khan and Chaudhry Ghulam Hussain on Wednesday.
The eight-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, comprises Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Mazahir Naqvi, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha Malik, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, and Justice Shahid Waheed.
Petitioner Raja Amir’s counsel Imtiaz Siddiqui says limiting the powers of the chief justice will affect the independence of the judiciary as well as other judges.
He commented that the case is significant under the current circumstances. He contended that the election commission and the federal government do not want elections to be held.
He says the Supreme Court is non-existent without the chief justice of Pakistan. The court is completed and starts working only after the appointment of the CJP.
Without the chief justice, even if there are other judges, the court is incomplete, Siddiqui maintained.
He said the court and judges faced personal criticism, and held the government ministers and lawmakers responsible for this.
Siddiqui argued that the proposed legislation interfered with the independence of the judiciary. He further said that under Article 191, the Supreme Court devised its rules itself.
The main question is whether the bill is worth becoming a law, the counsel remarked, adding the approval of the bill by the federal cabinet was illegal.
Tabling the bill in parliament and getting it approved was also illegal, the lawyer pleaded, adding the bill is not pending but a proposed Act.
Siddiqui argued that there were rules of the Supreme Court that parliament cannot amend.
A group of petitioners has asked the apex court to suspend a proposed bill during the pendency of their petition. They have also requested that President Dr Arif Alvi be directed not to assent to the bill, which would prevent it from becoming an act of parliament. The petitioners argue that the federal government cannot create any law that seeks to interfere with the functioning of the apex court or the powers exercised by it or its judges, including the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP), as per the Constitution.
The petitions assert that the bill in question is an unconstitutional measure and ultra vires, in direct violation of the constitutional mandate. The federal government’s actions represent a blatant violation of the Constitution, the petitioners added.
According to the petitions, the Supreme Court and its corpus, as defined in Article 176, comprises the CJP and a number of other judges determined by parliament or, until that determination is made, as fixed by the president. The CJP is the central force around which the entire structure of the apex court is woven. The preamble to the Constitution declares the independence of the judiciary and each of its judges, including the CJP, as an objective, and this is also part of the objective resolution and a substantive part of the Constitution, the petitions emphasized.
Meanwhile, the legal fraternity has expressed its opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision to hear petitions challenging a proposed law that has not yet been passed.
The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) has called for a countrywide boycott of courts today (Thursday) in protest against what it sees as the formation of a biased and contentious bench, which is taking up the matter prematurely.
Read more: Court quashes ECP’s plea seeking early hearing of Toshakhana case
