Home TRENDING ONLY THE PTI VOTED AGAINST LIMITING THE CJ’S AUTHORITY.

ONLY THE PTI VOTED AGAINST LIMITING THE CJ’S AUTHORITY.

ONLY THE PTI VOTED AGAINST LIMITING THE CJ'S AUTHORITY.

SHARE

ISLAMABAD:

The PTI is the sole political party raising concerns to the capacity of parliament to create laws relating discretionary powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP).

On Tuesday, PTI lawyer Uzair Bhandari argued in a full court hearing petitions against the Supreme Court (Practise and Procedure) Act, 2023 that the CJP’s discretionary powers should be limited, but only through a full court by changing Supreme Court Rules.

He was quite against the bill because it would limit the power of the supreme court judge.

The attorney further argued that modifying the SC Rules or passing new legislation would be unnecessary to grant the right of appeal in suo motu instances.

He argued that Article 184 (3) of the Constitution should be amended to allow for appeals of decisions made under its jurisdiction.

It is interesting to note that Justice Ijazul Ahsan, like PTI’s lawyer, is concerned about the competence of the legislation and the giving of the right of appeal under Article 184 (3) through ordinary legislation.

The legislative competence and the appeal of the judges’ view is divided on the legislative competence.

Some prominent solicitors feel that the jurisprudence developed by some courts over the past six years is at risk if the law is sustained. In cases where review petitions have already been decided, however, they claim it is unclear whether a right of appeal will be offered.
Public interest jurisdiction exercised by three former CJPs (Mian Saqib Nisar, Gulzar Ahmed, and Umar Ata Bandial) has benefited the PTI the most since the Panama judgement in July 2017.

However, these CJPs have used their public interest jurisdiction to target the PML-N and the PPP, the two other major political parties.

Since the judiciary was reinstated in March 2009, the highest court has continued to hold sway over the legislative and executive branches.
Judiciary reform legislation and constitutional modifications were subject to rigorous judicial review whenever they were passed by parliament.

Several legislation have also been struck down since March 2009.

However, as CJP Qazi Faez Isa pointed out during the hearing, the superior judiciary has kept silent about the conduct of the security apparatus in cases which directly affect the administration of justice.

Given that multiple judges have recently endorsed parliament’s competence to create laws to control the CJP’s unrestrained powers and to provide openness within the supreme court, the full court proceedings signal that the situation may have altered.

Surprisingly, every political party in court except the PPP has legal counsel. Lawyers for the PPP have reportedly been told that party leadership did not advise them to defend the Supreme Court (Practise and Procedure) Act, 2023.

SHARE