ISLAMABAD: The government Thursday rejected a larger bench set up to hear petitions challenging a bill to clip the powers of the chief justice, preventing him from taking suo motu notices in an individual capacity on issues of fundamental rights, and constitute benches for various cases, an issue which has deepened the rift between the ruling Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition and the Supreme Court.
Seeking amendments to the existing law, the legislation — called the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 — was introduced last month after the apex court took a suo motu notice of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) delaying elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Subsequently, on Wednesday, the Supreme Court formed an eight-judge bench to take up several identical petitions moved to challenge the bill. Headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, the bench comprised justices Ijaz ul-Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Shahid Waheed.
Notably absent from the bench are Justices Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Amin ud-Din Khan, who had previously ruled that the top judge did not have the power to form special benches, leading to the postponement of all suo motu cases.
In a statement released hours before the proceedings began on Thursday, the government rejected the bench and referred to it as “controversial”. The coalition also vowed to resist attempts to take away parliament’s authority and to interfere in its constitutional scope.
The ruling alliance termed the formation of the bench “unprecedented,” observing the pleas were admitted even before the completion of the legislative process. They further added that this move was equivalent to sabotaging the credibility of the country’s highest court, making the constitutional process of justice “meaningless”.
The coalition parties lamented the non-inclusion of judges from Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, highlighting the loopholes in the formation of the “controversial” bench, which does not include any of the judges who raised questions on the powers of the chief justice.
The statement added that attempts to snatch the authority of the parliament and to interfere in its constitutional domain would be resisted.
The statement mentioned that the top court judges, Justice Isa and Justice Khan, had in their earlier judgments openly expressed their objection to the “one-man show”, biased and dictatorial behaviour, and the formation of special benches.
The ruling alliance maintained that the constitution of the controversial bench in haste and fixing the bill for hearing, apart from the will and intent, also clearly expressed the decision to come, which was sad and tantamount to murder of justice.
Shortly after the release of the statement, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, flanked by ministers Qamar Zaman Kaira and Amin-ul-Haq, among other coalition party members, held a press conference.
Tarar expressed concern over the petitions challenging the bill to curtail the chief justice of Pakistan’s powers, which were being heard by a “selective bench” lacking the two most senior judges.
He claimed that the bench was formed on a “pick and choose” basis, and criticised the conflict of interest arising from the fact that the bill was passed against the top judge, and he himself was leading the bench. He noted that all the bar councils had unanimously rejected the bench’s formation.
The law minister further said the perception of a rift between parliament and the judiciary was incorrect, and the parliament had the right to legislate for the interest of the people and strengthen institutions.
He said it was not the right time to take up pleas against the bill as it has not yet become an Act. He also hoped that the bench would be dissolved today, and institutions would not interfere with parliament’s right to make laws.
