Another Supreme Court judge, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, has recused himself from the larger bench hearing the case regarding the delay in provincial assemblies’ elections, further escalating the crisis.
The lawyers questioned the legitimacy of the judicial proceedings in which voices were raised within the Supreme Court regarding the postponement of provincial assembly elections.
In the current circumstance, in which there is also conflict within the SC, the week following would be very important.
A horrendous happening was seen, when the SC enlistment center on Friday gave a round ignoring the two adjudicators’ legal request wherein it was held that becoming aware of all cases under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution be deferred until revisions were made in the SC Rules 1980 in regards to CJP’s optional powers to shape exceptional seats.
Now, the question arose as to whether an administrative order issued by the CJP could override a judicial decision.
The issue of the circular continued to be the subject of discussion. In the coming days, it was anticipated that a portion of the SC judges would express strong opposition to the move.
A lawyer stated that the “bench should have suspended the order for the time being” rather than disregarding the administrative aspect.
He stated that the SC registrar might be held in contempt for issuing the circular. However, with regard to the current situation within the SC, the week following would be even more significant.
Pakistan Bar Council Executive Committee Chairman Hasan Raza Pasha urged the CJP to call a full court meeting to discuss the current situation following the circular and Justice Mandokhail’s recusal.
Read The bench’s dissolution has no effect: Imran On the other hand, the chief justice stated that they were working on scheduling a full court meeting within the next few days.
However, it was discovered that the judges on both sides were less likely to sit down to discuss specific issues because of the SC’s high temperature.
“The CJP should have consulted the judges before issuance of the circular,” a lawyer stated.
The most disturbing thing was that Equity Mandokhail in his legal note in regards to his recusal said that three adjudicators – specifically CJP Bandial, Equity Ijaz ul Ahsan, and Equity Munib Akhtar – directed the request in his nonappearance and without reaching him for cooperation in the considerations.
According to the note, “I felt that the three learned members of the bench, for reasons best known to them, opted not to involve me in the consultation.”
The division among the SC judges was also reflected in the order.
During Friday’s hearing, it was demonstrated that CJP Bandial had sent a clear message to the establishment and executive authorities that elections for provincial assemblies “will be held, come what may.”
In a similar vein, he was supporting Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, who was going through a difficult time because of the misconduct allegations against him.
CJP Bandial explained why Justice Naqvi was added to the nine-member larger bench, claiming that there was a silent method of communicating with the outside world.
In addition, Justice Bandial stated that, in accordance with the Provisional Constitutional Order of November 3, 2007, he was the only remaining superior court judge who was removed for failing to take an oath.
He said that later a wonder occurred as he was again reestablished on his post as an appointed authority of the Lahore High Court.
Continue reading CJP Bandial denies AGP Awan’s request for a full court in the polls delay case Justice Bandial addressed the establishment for the first time during the hearing.
Because of the 20 years of terrorism in the country, he was curious why the armed forces were not providing security.
In addition, CJP Bandial made it abundantly clear that they would directly inquire into the reason for the absence of election security.
The CJP then requested that the AGP and the defense secretary appear before the bench on Monday.
That’s what he said assuming the SC request in regards to the holding of general decisions was not carried out then chief specialists would confront results.
It was up for debate whether a divided Supreme Court could compel the military to provide election security.
However, a PML-N attorney stated that the CJP’s remarks reflected his anger at being left out of the court.
However all fragments of society, individual appointed authorities, legal counselors and ideological groups, including the candidate party PTI, had no issue with the constitution of a full court, the seat was hesitant without giving any legitimate explanation.
In addition, CJP Bandial acknowledged that the Supreme Court was divided following the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s filing.
He stated that Justice Isa and the Supreme Court endured two years of hardship.
The CJP was of the opinion that Justice Naqvi’s complaint was a tax issue that should be dealt with by the tax authorities. However, a lawyer stated, “The CJP should place his matter before the Supreme Judicial Council for his exoneration if charges against Justice Naqvi are false.”
It was interesting that a bench of three judges led by CJP Bandial did not look into whether the petitioner, PTI, presented the case to the Supreme Court with malicious intent.
After the resolution of no confidence against former prime minister Imran Khan was passed, it was said that the constitutional institutions might not work well. After Imran was ousted, the PTI left the National Assembly. After that, they disbanded both of the provincial assemblies without providing a justification.