Pakistan SC sets up larger bench against bill recently passed to curtail powers of Chief Justice

 

Pakistan Supreme Court set up a larger bench on Wednesday (April 12) to hear petitions against the bill recently passed by the Parliament to curtail the powers of the Chief Justice.

Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial will preside over the proceedings of the eight-member bench, which will start hearing on Thursday against the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill.

Other members of the panel are Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Mazahir Naqvi, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazahar Naqvi, Justice Ayesha Malik, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, and Justice Shahid Waheed.

The bill was passed again this week after President Dr Arif Alvi returned the original bill to the Parliament, urging the lawmakers to reconsider the proposed law. However, the Parliament in a joint sitting passed the same bill again and sent it to Alvi for assent.

The present can now delay it for ten days only and after the lapse of the mandatory period, it will become a law even without his signature.

The Express Tribune reported that one of the petitions filed by Advocate Shafay Munir claimed that the bill should be declared illegal and unconstitutional as only the top court had the authority to make its own rules.

The petition contended that the Constitution had made it clear that the ?independence of the judiciary? should be fully secured and the ?Parliament has no powers to pass such an act to curtail the powers of (the) Supreme Court or its Chief Justice or the judges?.

It maintained that the president had ?highlighted the aspects? that required reconsideration, but the Parliament failed to reconsider the same and passed the bill beyond its powers.

The petition stated that Article 191 of the Constitution stated that ?subject to the Constitution and law, the Supreme Court may make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the court?. It continued that the powers to make SC rules were ?expressly entrusted? to the court itself and not to the Parliament.

Therefore, it stated, the Parliament did not have the powers to ?enact any sort of legislation in relation to the powers and procedures of the Supreme Court?.

The petition prayed that the top court accept the petition and declare the bill as ?ultra vires and unconstitutional and of no legal effect?.

Earlier, the government sponsored bill was passed by the parliament to reduce the powers of the chief justice to take sup motu action and set up panels of judges for cases. It also provided the right of appeal against the suo motu decisions.