Eight-judge SC bench to take up pleas against 26th Amendment on 27th

An eight-member bench of the Supreme Court has been constituted to hear petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment, reported 24NewsHD TV channel on Monday.

Head by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, the bench consisted of Justice Jamal Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha Malik, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Shahid Bilal.

The top court will take up the matter on January 27.

The petitions raise significant legal and constitutional questions regarding the amendment, prompting the formation of this high-powered bench.

Earlier, the Supreme Court expressed displeasure over the delay in compliance with its directive to fix the hearing regarding the jurisdiction of regular benches court and sought an explanation.

Last week, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, directed the Registrar Office to take up the matter .

The court observed that it passed clear directives to fix the case on Monday but the Registrar Office did not put it on the cause list.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asked the Supreme Court deputy registrar why the case related to the court’s jurisdiction was not fixed for hearing yet.

The top court was supposed to deliberate on whether regular benches could hear matters involving the constitutionality of laws, following the establishment of the constitutional bench under the 26th Amendment but it deferred the deliberations until Monday.

The deliberation was pushed to Jan 20 following a change in the bench’s composition, with Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi replacing Justice Irfan Saadat Khan as its third member, who was previously part of the court when the issue initially cropped up. 

Deputy registrar Zulfiqar Ahmed informed the court that the additional registrar was unwell and on leave. The court was told that judges’ committee decided that the case related to the 26th Amendment would be heard by the constitutional bench on Jan 27.

“I myself am part of this committee and I am not aware of this,” Justice Shah said while Justice Ayesha Malik questioned how could the administrative committee ignore the judicial order.

Justice Abbasi asked the deputy registrar if the court order was placed before the committee, which the latter affirmed.

“Why was the whole week’s cause list changed?” Justice Malik asked. “We had scheduled tax cases which were changed.”

The deputy registrar said no written order was received from the judges’ committee. “If the committee order was not received then why was the case not scheduled?” Justice Shah wondered. “How can a scheduled case be transferred to the Constitutional Bench?” Justice Malik wondered.

“No one, including the chief justice, has the authority to transfer a case,” Justice Abbasi said. He went on to say that similar attempts were made when he was at the Sindh High Court.

Justice Malik asked why other cases were delisted, noting that the cases had been scheduled under court orders.

“Everyone, including the chief justice, is bound by court orders,” Justice Abbasi noted.