CJP bars judges from asking questions while hearing challenges to SC practice law

Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa has barred fellow judges sitting on the full court from asking questions during the hearing of nine challenges to the Supreme Court (Practice & Procedure) Act, 2023, which is being streamed live on national television, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

The 15-member full court was conducting the fourth hearing on Tuesday and at the start of every hearing the CJP had declared that the court will wrap up the case today but it could not do so due to time constraints, partly due to lengthy arguments being presented by the counsels and the frequent interruptions by the judges, putting up queries which led to hearing being adjourned.

As the proceedings were set into motion on Tuesday, the CJP interrupted the arguments himself this time restraining his colleagues from asking questions until the arguments are complete.

When Justice Ijazul Ahsan tried to pop a question, Justice Isa directed the counsel not to answer it and focus on his arguments. “This is the fourth hearing of this and case and other cases are being delayed due to it,” the CJP added.

Justice Isa urged his colleagues to halt their questions. “Everyone on the bench wants to fire a query but let the lawyer complete his argument,” he remarked.

The CJP also stopped Justice Munib Akhtar from asking questions again and again. Justice Munib Akhtar responded, saying “I am also a judge of this court and asking questions is a right of the judge,” he hit back.

Justice Isa “You should field your questions when the arguments will conclude.”

Then, Justice Akhtar said “I regret that I am being interrupted again and again.”

Ignoring CJP’s directive, Justice Munib Akhtar went ahead with his question, asking the lawyer to just tell him as to what Article 191 means?

The Chief Justice remarked that he is not interrupting the question. He asked his fellow judges to listen to the lawyer and then the questions would be answered, we should write the decision instead of giving an opinion beforehand.

Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan’s (MQM-P) lawyer Faisal Siddiqui said that Parliament cannot legislate to curtail the powers of the Supreme Court, but this principle is not affected by the existing law.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan said that the Act interfered with the independence of the Supreme Court. He wanted the lawyer to answer whether the law has interfered with the internal working of the Supreme Court.

Justice Munib Akhtar asked whether the legislative entries give the Parliament supervisory powers over the Supreme Court.

Lawyer Siddiqui said that they could read “subject to” and “law” separately.

Justice Ahsan asked why the Constitution has said that judiciary, executive and legislative are separate.

Siddiqui said that the Act does not interfere in the internal working of the Supreme Court. The Parliament does not enact such legislation which bars the Supreme Court from making its rules, he added.

Justice Ahsan remarked that the Parliament violated all the constitutional limits while enacting this Act.

Qureshi said that he would explain that no violation has been committed by describing all the clauses that would be read together with the Act. He said that Parliament could supervise the parliament.

Justice Ahsan interjected remarking that supervising means to get control of the Supreme Court.

Qureshi said that even Parliament has limits to it supervisory role.

Justice Munib inquired whether the legislative entries give supervisory authority to the Parliament over the Supreme Court.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah remarked that if Article 191 is read in conjunction with Legislative Entry 58, Parliament had complete power to legislate.

He said that Salahuddin gave this reference that the Parliament could even abolish the Supreme Court rules. The law says that the appeal would be sent to a larger bench, but the question is will this larger bench consist of all new judges? Will a larger bench be made by adding new judges to the bench which heard the case in the first place, Justice Shah asked.

The full court could not complete the hearing on Tuesday as well and the proceedings were adjourned for Wednesday at 11:30 am.

Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court resumed hearing a set of petitions challenging the SC (Practice and Procedure) Act seeking to scuttle the powers of the chief justice of Pakistan. A 15-judge Full Court led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa is hearing the case.

The Full Court consists of CJP Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A. Malik, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed and Justice Musarrat Hilali.

The attorney general, lawyers of the Pakistan Bar Council, and others are supposed to present their arguments on the case.

At every previous proceeding, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa expressed his resolve to conclude the case but the case was prolonged and the proceedings still linger.

So far, the Full Court has conducted three, while the larger bench led by former chief justice Umar Ata Bandial held five hearings of the case.

In a pre-emptive move, the SC larger bench ordered a ban on the law in the first hearing on April 13.

Under the act, the authority of taking suo motu notices and formation of benches has been assigned to a bench consisting of three senior judges including the chief justice of Pakistan. The affected party will also be given the right of appeal in the Review plea within a month, and it could also be allowed to change its lawyer. The law gives the right of appeal in Review pleas with retrospective effect.

During yesterday’s hearing, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa expressed his exasperation over the submission of additional documents. He remarked that since today was the last day of the hearing, any submissions could have been done before.

The top judge fumed as to how the justice system would run like this. He said nowhere in the world such things happen.

CJP Isa observed that parliament must not be hindered from doing something good only because it lacks a two-thirds majority. He further remarked that the Parliament passed the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 with good intentions.

 

Reporter Babar Shahzad Turk