— Justice Akhtar says he could not be part of bench formed under Practice and Procedure Ordinance
— CJP Isa says he would ask Justice Akhtar to be part of the bench being author judge
ISLAMABAD: Differences within the Supreme Court have intensified as a second letter from Justice Munib Akhtar surfaced within 12 hours, questioning the legality of the four-judge bench’s proceedings in the Article 63-A review case.
In his latest letter to the Supreme Court Registrar, Justice Akhtar raised concerns about the composition of the bench, stating that a five-member larger bench was required to hear the case. “A four-member bench cannot sit to review the Article 63-A case,” Justice Akhtar wrote.
He further noted that although the order from today’s hearing included his name, he had not signed it. “The four judges on the bench are honourable, but today’s proceedings are not in accordance with the law or court rules,” he said. “I want to register my protest against today’s order, which is not a judicial one and has no legal standing.”
On the other hand, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa has convened an important meeting of the Judges’ Practice and Procedure Committee for tomorrow at 9am. Sources suggest that another judge may be inducted to replace Justice Akhtar in the Article 63-A review case.
Earlier, Justice Akhtar had objected to the formation of benches and the judges’ committee. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah had also previously raised concerns about the amended ordinance under which the judges’ committee was formed.
Justice Munib Akhtar also skipped a hearing on a petition seeking a review of the 2022 verdict on the defection clause under Article 63-A of the Constitution.
The review plea, filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), was set to be taken up by a five-member larger bench at 11:30am on Monday.
Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, the bench was supposed to comprise Justices Akhtar, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel.
Justice Akhtar’s decision comes against the backdrop of his removal from the three-judge committee established under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 after the promulgation of an amendment ordinance granting the CJP authority to select any judge as the committee’s third member.
In a letter, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, a member of the three-judge committee, had announced boycotting the panel over “unfettered and arbitrary discretion” vested in CJP’s role, while protesting Justice Akhtar’s removal.
In response to Justice Shah, CJP Isa listed several reasons for Justice Akhtar’s removal from the committee, including his alleged indifference to a piling backlog of cases.
On Monday, all judges except Justice Akhtar appeared in the courtroom. Justice Isa noted that the judge had penned him a letter stating “I cannot be a part of this bench”.
In his letter, Justice Akhtar stated that he could not be a part of the bench formed by the committee under the Practice and Procedure Ordinance.
The chief justice said Justice Akhtar was present at the apex court, and adjourned the hearing till Tuesday, saying he would ask the judge to be a part of the bench as the review petition ought to be heard by a five-member bench as per the original case.
