— CJP Isa, Hamid Khan exchange heated argument during hearing
— PTI lawyer accuses CJP of being ‘biased’ against PTI
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has upheld its January 13 decision and dismissed a review petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) concerning its intra-party elections.
The ruling was made by a three-member bench, led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Musarrat Hilali.
During the hearing, the court noted that despite offering an additional opportunity, the legal representatives for the parties did not present any arguments that would warrant a change in the earlier decision.
“No error in our January 13 ruling has been demonstrated, so the review petition is dismissed,” the court stated.
Barrister Ali Zafar, representing PTI, argued that a constitutional amendment had since been passed, suggesting the Supreme Court should no longer hear the case.
Chief Justice Isa responded, noting that he had not reviewed the amendment and had no information regarding it at the time.
The ruling marks the final closure of PTI’s attempt to challenge the intra-party election process.
Meanwhile, a heated exchange occurred between Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawyer Hamid Khan and Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa during the Supreme Court’s hearing on the review petition regarding PTI’s intra-party elections.
Tensions flared during Hamid Khan’s arguments when he stated that a three-member bench could not hear the case, citing a previous 13-member bench ruling.
Chief Justice Isa questioned why this point was not raised earlier, prompting Khan to assert that the court should refer to the Election Commission and Sunni Ittehad Council case decisions.
The situation escalated when Hamid Khan accused the Chief Justice of being biased.
Chief Justice Isa responded, “I prefer people who speak to my face, not on TV.” Khan replied that he could not argue before a judge he believed to be biased.
The exchange continued with the Chief Justice questioning whether the court was being treated as a platform for casual conversation.
Hamid Khan then remarked that while it was an honour to appear before the court, he would refrain from making further arguments.
