The Supreme Court suspended the decisions on the formation of election tribunals, also rejected the objection of Chief Justice Faiz Isa – Pakistan

The Supreme Court suspended the decisions of the Lahore High Court and the Election Commission on the formation of the Election Tribunal, rejected the objection of the Tehreek-e-Insaf on the larger bench, the Supreme Court directed to consult with the Chief Justice of the Election Commission, Justice Lahore High Court. The two can resolve this dispute through consultation and the appeal in the Supreme Court will remain pending until the consultation.

A five-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa heard the case. The bench included Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Aqeel Abbasi and Justice Jamal Mandukhel.

Earlier, during the hearing on the appeal of the Election Commission against the decision to form election tribunals in the Supreme Court, the leaders of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf raised objections against the Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faiz Isa.

The request of the Election Commission to suspend the decision to establish election tribunals was rejected

In the second hearing, Election Commission’s lawyer Sikander Momin argued that the formation of election tribunals is the authority of the Election Commission. Meanwhile, PTI’s lawyer Niazullah Niazi said that we want to put our objection on record, the case should be sent to another bench.

On which the Chief Justice rejected the objection and remarked that the current bench will hear the hearing. The Chief Justice remarked that your objection has been noted, this matter is between the Election Commission and the Chief Justice, why is a private individual so interested in this case?

The members of the bench, including the Chief Justice, expressed their anger

The bench members including the Chief Justice expressed their anger. Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa remarked that during the previous hearing, Pro-Kail Salman Akram Raja was asked about the objection. I was included in the 2-member bench on the first day, then no objection was raised.

The Chief Justice further remarked that Niazullah Niazi made an application in the last hearing, we approved it, after the application was approved, now objection was raised, the bench wants to make headlines by raising the objection, the committee formed the bench, not the Chief Justice, just a lot of judicial secondaryization. We will ask for action on such behavior, why not send Niazullah Niazi’s case to Pakistan Bar for disciplinary action?

Are you sitting here to insult?

The Chief Justice called Salman Akram Raja to the rostrum and asked whether you also object to my joining the bench. Salman Akram Raja said, “No, my lord, I have no objection.” Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that we have been put in the bench by the committee, are we sitting here to be insulted?

He further remarked that we three members joined the bench later, apparently objecting to me. Niazullah Niazi said that the person who is in jail also has an objection.

The person who appeared from jail did not object to the bench

The Chief Justice remarked that the person he is referring to has appeared on video link from the jail, the person who appeared from the jail had not raised any objection before the bench.

The court rejected Niazullah Niazi’s objection on the bench. Justice Jamal Mandukhel said that now the courts do not follow the wishes of the people.

The Chief Justice said that these people want decisions of their own choice.

It should be noted that on June 13, the Election Commission challenged the Lahore High Court’s decision to form election tribunals in the Supreme Court. was scheduled for hearing.

Order of Lahore High Court to appoint additional Election Tribunal Judges in Punjab

On June 20, the Supreme Court of Pakistan rejected the request of the Election Commission to suspend the decision to establish election tribunals and sent the matter to a 3-member committee for the formation of a larger bench. He remarked that if the work is to be done by ordinance, then parliament should be closed, bringing ordinance is an insult to parliament.