— Amin ud-Din Khan steps down after questioning chief justice’s ‘unilateral power’ to select judges
— Bench members to be decided tomorrow, court order says
— PTI counsel calls Supreme Court ‘ultimate safeguard for democracy’
ISLAMABAD: Following the recusal of a member from the case, the Supreme Court announced that a new four-judge bench will hear the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) challenging the decision of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to postpone elections to the Punjab Assembly on Friday.
The original five-judge bench was dissolved after a member, Justice Amin ud-Din Khan, recused himself from the case. He made the decision a day after arguing that the Constitution does not give the chief justice unilateral power to select judges, form special benches, or list cases for hearing.
On Wednesday, in a 12-page judgement, co-authors Justice Khan and Justice Qazi Faez Isa suggested that cases under Article 184(3) of the Constitution be postponed until amendments are made to the Supreme Court Rules 1980 regarding the discretionary powers of the chief justice to form benches.
They argued that the chief justice cannot substitute his wisdom with that of the Constitution and that collective determination by the chief justice and other judges of the Supreme Court cannot be assumed by an individual, even if it is the chief justice.
The dissolution of the bench occurred shortly before the court proceedings were scheduled to begin.
In an order, read by the court staff on Thursday, the Supreme Court said the bench members will be determined on Friday, and the case will be heard before a bench that won’t include Justice Khan. The hearing is scheduled to take place at 11:30 am.
The original bench, which had conducted three hearings on the petition, was constituted by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and included Justice Ijaz ul-Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, and Justice Khan.
A bone of contention arose among top judges during proceedings on Wednesday, with Justice Mandokhail questioning the “order of the court” in the suo motu proceedings relating to the March 1 judgement on elections.
He expressed regret that no “order of the court” had been released, questioning how April 30 could be announced as the election date or its extension until Oct 8 in the absence of such an order.
Meanwhile, Justice Akhtar challenged the notion that the minority could claim to be in the majority, given that all five judges had signed the original short order.
In response to the development, Barrister Ali Zafar, who represents the PTI in the case, said the Supreme Court needs to address the current issue arising from conflicting views among judges.
While speaking to reporters outside the court, Zafar suggested the court should either convene a full bench or another combination of judges to resolve the matter. He stressed that the issue at hand is not limited to the composition of court benches but is a fundamental constitutional matter concerning whether the ECP has the right to postpone or determine the timing of elections.
Although Zafar acknowledged that there may be a slight delay, he expressed confidence that a new bench would be formed to hear the case.
He also emphasised the crucial role of the court as the “ultimate safeguard for democracy” and expressed hope that the court would uphold its responsibility to ensure a fair and just resolution of the matter.
