Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) and senior judge of Supreme Court of Pakistan have locked horns over the formation of the bench hearing appeals in the Article 63-A case with Justice Munib Akhtar did not show up while rest of the bench members including Justice Qazi Faez Isa were in courtroom on Monday, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

The dramatic scene came to surface as Justice Munib Akhtar skipped the hearing on Monday, saying he could not attend the proceedings as the five-judge bench was formed by the new judges committee.

A five-member bench led by Justice Isa and consisting of Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Mandokhail and Justice Mazhar Alam, was due to take up the appeals on Monday when the CJP announced that Justice Munib had informed him in writing that he would not be able to attend proceedings. The proceedings were then adjourned.

The letter written by Justice Munib to the registrar said that the bench had been formed by a new judges committee under the Practice and Procedure ordinance, therefore he could not be part of the bench. He also requested that his absence may not be misconstrued and that the letter should be made part of the court’s record.

In response, CJP Isa said the bench would try to convince Justice Munib to attend the proceedings on Tuesday. He added that the letter could not be added to the court’s record as per tradition.

The chief justice, on the occasion, read out the letter written by Justice Munib Akhtar to the SC registrar in which he had informed him of his non-availability to hear the case.

The CJP said, “We will go to Justice Muneeb and request him to sit on the bench.”

“We will try to convince him. And in case, we fail in our efforts, then the bench will be reconstituted.”  

The law, Justice Isa went on to say, demanded that the same bench should hear the review petition which had given the decision in the case. “I have replaced the ex-CJP Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who had headed the original bench, while Justice Ameenuddin has replaced Justice (r) Ijazul Ahsan,” he added.

As per the text of Justice Muneeb’s letter, the judge said he was not refusing to become part of the bench. “I just cannot sit on the bench constituted by the Practice and Procedure Committee,” he added. The judge also requested that his letter be made part of the case’s record.

The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of the review petitions filed in the case of the interpretation of Article 63-A of the constitution until tomorrow.

The Supreme Court had previously scheduled the review appeals on the interpretation of Article 63-A for September 23rd.

The court’s May 17, 2022, decision on a presidential reference regarding Article 63-A stated that a vote cast by a defected member of parliament against party policy would not be counted, and that the duration of disqualification would be determined by parliament.

This 3-2 decision, led by then-Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, saw Justices Mazhar Alam Miankhel and Jamal Khan Mandokhail dissenting. The majority opinion, written by Justice Munib Akhtar, was challenged through various review petitions that have remained pending until now.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) had filed a review petition against the judgment, arguing that the framers of the constitution intended the disregard of defecting votes to be a temporary measure.

 

 Reporter Amanat Gishkori