Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued a minority detailed judgment in the case of reserved seats. Chief Justice Qazi Isa also wrote a 14-page additional note that ‘the brief decision of eight judges of July 12 and the detailed decision of September 23 is full of errors, it is expected that the majority judges will consider their mistakes and correct them.’
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa He said that the Constitution of Pakistan is written and in simple language. There are also constitutional errors in the September 14 and October 18 explanations of the eight majority judges. It is my duty to point out the constitutional violations and shortcomings in the decision.
The Chief Justice further said that ‘Unfortunately, the revision hearing in the case of reserved seats could not be scheduled. My fellow judges Justice Mansoor and Justice Muneeb voted against the revision petition. In the committee meeting, Justice Muneeb Akhtar and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah took the position of not appointing a review. I hope the majority judges will correct their mistakes and the majority judges will ensure that Pakistan is run according to the constitution. The system of Pakistan should run under the constitution.
Eight judges formed their own court apart from 13 judges.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa said in a detailed judgment that ‘eight judges made their own court apart from 13 judges and not only allowed petitions to be filed against the law but also changed the constitution itself.’
“Interestingly, none of the parties during the hearing of the case gave any suggestion to adopt this procedure and no justification for this procedure was given in the majority brief and detailed judgment,” he added. . In fact, the majority of judges overruled their own position. These majority judges wrote that petitions of PTI and Election Commission will be heard only by them, while the unanimous law of the Supreme Court is that revision is heard by the same bench which heard the original petition.
‘Implementation of decision of specific seats not binding’
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa said that the appeals in the case of specific seats have not been decided. A majority of judges have left room for clarification applications. Since the case has not been finally decided, its implementation is not ‘binding’. Contempt of court action cannot be taken if the decision is not implemented. The provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan are very clear and unambiguous, it is better not to look for demands and meanings in the Constitution which are not there.’
He further said that the specific seats case was related to Article 51 and 106, but in the decision of the majority of eight judges, these articles were briefly considered, the first 58 pages of the majority decision are about general elections, political parties, articles 17 and 19. and related to certain specific provisions of the Election Act. The majority judges in their explanatory judgment have mentioned a petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf, which is not signed by PTI or its chairman Gohar Khan.
Comment on tenure of office of Chief Justice after constitutional amendment
The Chief Justice wrote that the first hearing of the case of specific leaks was first scheduled before a three-member bench, on which the decision of the Peshawar High Court and the Election Commission of Pakistan was suspended on the same day and approved for hearing. The same three-member bench decided that the case should be presented before a three-member committee constituted under the Practice and Procedure Act for hearing in a larger bench.
As Chief Justice, I suggested that the proposed amendment to the Constitution is being discussed. The trial should not involve judges who are likely to either benefit or be affected by the constitutional amendment. If the tenure of the Chief Justice is three years, the Chief Justice as well as five other judges could potentially be affected. But in the Practice and Procedure Committee, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Muneeb Akhtar opposed this, so I said that then the full court will hear this case.
This section contains related reference points (Related Nodes field).
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah legislated in General Bajwa’s extension case: Chief Justice
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa has written that ‘Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has deviated from his previous decision in this decision. When the issue of extending the tenure of former Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa came before him. The then Prime Minister Imran Khan, Law Minister Farogh Naseem and Attorney General wanted General Bajwa to remain as Army Chief. Farogh Naseem resigned from the post of federal minister and advocated General Bajwa and Abid Zuberi supported him.
He further wrote that the case was decided within two days. The request was neither accepted nor rejected, but what the parties wanted was given. The court extended General Bajwa’s tenure by six months, which was tantamount to legislation. The Constitution should not be subject to the whims of individuals and those who do so or assist in it should be impeached.’
Case of reserved seats
A majority bench of the full bench of the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the PTI on the issue of reserved seats in the Sunni Unity Council, but the two dissenting judges said in a detailed dissenting note that ‘to give relief to the PTI’ Article 51, Article 63 and Article 106 of the Constitution should be suspended.
The Election Commission of Pakistan ruled under Article 53 (6) of the Constitution, Section 104 of the Election Act, rejecting the request of the Sunni Etihad Council for allotment of reserved seats. The Election Commission had said in its written decision that ‘Sunni Ittehad Council cannot be allotted specific seats, due to violation of law and failure to provide the party list at the beginning, Sunni Ittehad Council is not entitled to specific seats. has not submitted list for specific seats. So these specific seats will not remain vacant, they will be distributed among political parties in a specific proportional representation method.
The Sunni Ittehad Council challenged the decision in the Supreme Court. Initially, a three-member bench headed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah was formed to hear this case, which on May 6 suspended the decision of the Election Commission and the Peshawar High Court to give the seats of the Sunni Unity Council to other parties and the Attorney General On the plea, the matter was referred to the Practice and Procedure Committee to constitute a full court or a larger bench, after which a full court was constituted on June 3.
#Minority #verdict #reserved #seats #eightjudge #explanation #full #errors #Chief #Justice
