Request for record of parliamentary proceedings on Supreme Court Powers Bill

The Supreme Court has called for the record of the parliamentary proceedings on the Practice and Procedure Act 2023.

An 8-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Atta Bandyal heard the case against the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023. Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Mazahir Naqvi, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha Malik, Justice Azhar Hasan Rizvi and Justice Shahid Waheed are part of the larger bench.

During the hearing, the court called for a written response from all the parties in the case. The Chief Justice remarked that the previous order was of an interim nature. Democracy is one of the main features of the constitution. Independent judiciary and federalism are also important features of the constitution. See if the judiciary can change? . Independence of judiciary is a fundamental right. In this regard, this case is unique.

Also read this news: Parliament will go to extreme lengths to protect its powers, said the Information Minister

The Chief Justice remarked that a serious discussion is expected from the parties on the case. A larger bench will have to provide excellent support. This is the first law of its kind in Pakistan. This is about the third pillar of the state. The court called for the record of the parliamentary proceedings on the Supreme Court Rules and Procedure Bill. Apart from this, the Supreme Court adjourned the further hearing of the case till Monday by calling for the record of the discussion in the Standing Committee. The court asked the political parties and lawyers’ organizations to respond by May 8.

Earlier, during the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked that there are some limitations and limitations of the federal list related to the power of legislation. Also review section 55 of the Federal Legislative List. The fact that an independent judiciary is a fundamental component of the Constitution cannot be changed. It is alleged that for the first time in the history of the country, the basic component of the constitution was violated through legislation.

On behalf of the Pakistan Bar Council, Hasan Raza Pasha told the court that the Pakistan Bar has always fought for the constitution and the judiciary. It would be appropriate if a full court was constituted in this case. If seven senior judges are included in the bench, no one will be able to object. 6 references have been filed against one bench member. On this occasion, the Pakistan Bar Council requested Justice Mazahir Naqvi to be removed from the bench.

The Supreme Court has extended the order to stop the implementation of the law while rejecting the request to form a full court.

The Chief Justice remarked that it is the power of the Chief Justice to make 7 senior judges and a full court. In the Iftikhar Chaudhry case, the court had declared that only the President can file a reference. A reference against a judge cannot prevent him from acting. A judge cannot be stopped from working till the opinion of the Supreme Judicial Council. The court also gave the same decision in Justice Qazi Faiz Isa’s case.

The Chief Justice said that complaints keep coming against the judges. Complaints are coming against most of the judges of the Supreme Court, including me. Political matters have polluted the environment of the court. Political people want arbitrary decisions, not justice. In the election case, some judges were also asked to form a full court. The decision of the judges of the Supreme Court is the decision of the court. Every institution is bound to implement the orders of the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that Pasha Sahib, you are a sophisticated man, find out from those around you who your people call full court. The Supreme Court Bar has to protect the institution. Judges have to come and go. If the Supreme Court judges were chosen instead of being respected, then you don’t want justice.

During the hearing, the Attorney General of Pakistan requested that the court should consider increasing the bench, on which the Chief Justice remarked that first understand what the law is and why it was made. The number of benches can also be reduced. The court rejected the request of the Attorney General to withdraw the injunction.