ISLAMABAD: An eight-member larger bench of the Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan on Monday is hearing a set of petitions against the recently passed law aimed at curtailing the powers and authority of the chief justice of Pakistan (CJP).
The bench consists of CJP Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Shahid Waheed, and Justice Ayesha Malik,
CJP Bandial, at the last hearing on May 2, had sought the record of National Assembly (NA) proceedings from when the House deliberated upon the bill that has since become an act of Parliament.
The bench had asked the attorney general for Pakistan (AGP) to provide copies of the House and standing committee proceedings to understand the views and concerns of the lawmakers while passing the bill”.
The CJP had also put aside the request by Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) for a full court, saying that it would be considered again during the next hearing.
The government then asked the SC to convene a full court to discuss crucial issues about the judiciary’s independence and Parliament’s authority to control the court’s proceedings. Separately, the government requested that the court dismiss the legal challenges.
Today’s hearing
AGP Mansoor Usman Awan announced to the court at the beginning of the proceedings today that a plea had been submitted for the formation of a full court to hear the case. He added, “The PML-N has also submitted a plea for establishing a full court.
Justice Ahsan pointed out that a hearing date had not yet been set for the government’s plea. Then, he inquired with the AGP regarding the status of the court’s requested documents from the previous hearing. Awan said he has spoken to the NA speaker about getting the record of parliamentary proceedings before tomorrow.
The AGP noted that “the judiciary’s independence is an important component of the Constitution.” He claimed that the relevant law had specified how to form benches and handle appeals. He asserted that since a full court created the SC’s regulations, “the matters decided in the law are administrative.”
He added that cases and decisions concerning the judiciary’s rules and independence should involve a full court, adding that the law would also apply to judges not hearing the case.
However, Justice Ahsan argued that the issue was with the ability to legislate rather than changes to SC rules. He added that several benches regularly heard matters involving legislative authority.
At this point, Justice Naqvi questioned if such a law had been enacted in the past. The AGP said that the president’s permission was required to make rules until 1973. After then, Justice Naqvi questioned how such a law could be passed in light of Article 191 of the Constitution. “Subject to the Constitution and law, the SC may make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the court,” reads Article 191 of the Constitution.
