ISLAMABAD , April 3, 2023: A three-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday resumed hearing of the plea challenging delay in the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa elections by the Election Commission of Pakistan.
At the outset, Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial asked government counsel Farooq H. Naek whether the coaltion had boycotted the proceedings. “How can anyone boycott proceedings of the case,” he inquired. He said newspaper reports suggested that the government had boycotted the proceedings and how could he give arguments.
He lauded the attorney general for saying that the government had not boycotted the court proceedings and asked him to give the assurance in writing.
He said only the apex court had the authority to delay elections and the Election Commission of Pakistan had no such power to do so.
Hours earlier, the Shehbaz-led government filed a fresh petition in the Supreme Court, seeking the reconstitution of the bench hearing the elections’ delay case without judges who heard the suo motu notice.
A miscellaneous plea was filed by Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan ahead of the scheduled hearing of the suo motu on the PTI petition challenging the order of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for postponing the Punjab election to Oct 8.
Justice Mandokhail and Justice Aminuddin earlier recused themselves from hearing the case. The bench was broken up twice after the two judges decided not to be part of the bench. The three-member bench summoned the secretaries of interior and finance.
A three-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday resumed hearing of the plea challenging delay in the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa elections by the Election Commission of Pakistan.
The court reserved verdict on the case and is likely to announce it on Tuesday. At the outset, Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial asked PPP counsel Farooq H. Naek whether his party had boycotted the proceedings.
Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Awan, ECP lawyers Irfan Qadir and Sajeel Swati and PTI lawyer Ali Zafar were also present in the courtroom as the hearing bagan. Also in attendance were secretaries of finance and defence.
“How can you boycott the case and at the same time attend the hearing,” Justice Akhtar said. “How can anyone boycott proceedings of the case,” he inquired. He said newspaper reports suggested that the government had boycotted the proceedings and how could he (Mr Naek) give arguments. He also asked Mr Naek to read out the joint statement and expressed displeasure with the language used in it.
The CJP asked the PPP lawyer if he wanted to become a part of the proceedings and Mr Naek assured that his party did not boycott the hearing. Justice Bandial said something else was written in the newspapers and the PPP counsel replied that his party had reservations on the maintainability of the petition. The CJP asked Mr Naek to give assurance in writing that the party had not boycotted the hearing.
Justice Bandial then inquired about the directions the AGP had received. Mr Awan replied that the government worked under the Constitution and could not boycott the proceedings. He, however, claimed that the PTI petition was based on the SC’s March 1 verdict in which the apex court had instructed the president to select a date for elections in Punjab and the governor to pick a date for polls in KP. The KP governor did not select a date until the petition was filed, he said.
The question had been raised on how could the ECP give the date of Oct 8 for polls, the CJP said. He said only the apex court had the authority to delay elections and the Election Commission of Pakistan had no such power to do so.
The CJP also said the circular issued by the Supreme Court did not overrule the order given by a bench, headed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
Meanwhile, Justice Ahsan said the actual matter under consideration was the ECP’s decision to postpone elections. The commission, he said, was bound to follow the court orders.
The AGP said that during the first round of the hearings, a nine-member bench had conducted the proceedings. “On Feb 21, we received the order of the court which included dissenting notes from two judges. The two judges had dismissed the case in the first hearing,” he said.
However, the CJP said only one judge had dismissed the proceedings. “Justice Athar Minallah had not mentioned rejecting the request in his dissenting note,” he said.
“Justice Yahya Afridi had agreed with Justice Minallah in his note,” the AGP argued to which Justice Bandial stated that the court had understood Awan’s stance.
Justice Akhtar recalled that on Feb 27, a nine-member bench had submitted the matter to the CJP for the reconstitution of the bench. The new bench had five judges, he added.
CJP Bandial also remarked harmony among judges was crucial for the Supreme Court. He said judicial proceedings were made public but consultations among judges were considered an internal matter.
– PML-N govt’s fresh plea –
Hours earlier, the Shehbaz-led government filed a fresh petition in the Supreme Court, seeking the reconstitution of the bench hearing the elections’ delay case without judges who heard the suo motu notice.
A miscellaneous plea was filed by Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan ahead of the scheduled hearing of the suo motu on the PTI petition challenging the order of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for postponing the Punjab election to Oct 8.
Justice Mandokhail and Justice Aminuddin earlier recused themselves from hearing the case. The bench was broken up twice after the two judges decided not to be part of the bench. The three-member bench summoned the secretaries of interior and finance.
During the previous hearing, the request of the Attorney General for Pakistan to form a full court was rejected by the Supreme Court. In the case, the arguments of PTI lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar and Election Commission’s lawyer Sajeel Swati were completed.
At the previous hearing, the chief justice had observed in his remarks that there would be important news on Monday. “We have shown restraint,” he remarked. The government would have to forget the past, he observed.
It should be noted that in the election case, the Pakistan Peoples Party, the PML-N and the JUI-F have requested to become parties and constitution of the full court.
A number of personnel representing the Islamabad police, Frontier Corps and Rangers have been deployed in and outside the Supreme Court.
— The federation’s plea —
The petition has requested the Supreme Court to dismiss the election delay case in view of the majority (4-3) order/judgment of March 1. It further stated that the proceedings in the instant petition may kindly be postponed in light of the order passed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa, postponing all the proceedings in suo motu matters.
“This Hon’ble Bench, in view of submissions made in paragraphs 11 and 12, may graciously recuse from hearing the instant petition and a bench comprising of all remaining Hon’ble Judges of this court, who did not hear SMC No. 1/2023, CPs No 1 and 2 of 2023, may kindly be constituted to decide the questions raised herein,” the plea requested.
— Lawyers express solidarity with CJ —
A good number of lawyers reached the SC after crossing hurdles and expressed solidarity with Chief Justice Bandial. PTI leader Azam Swati is also present. Some lawyers raised slogans in favour of judiciary on the arrival of judges.
— PTI slams govt for sabotaging constitution —
PTI leaders slammed the Shehbaz-led government for “attacking” the Constitution, pinpointing the PML-N for pressurising the country’s top court.
Speaking to reporters in Karachi on Sunday, PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi said the ruling coalition’s decision to file a reference against three SC judges was a signal to pressurise them.
— SC to be urged to clear uncertainty —
On Sunday, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif held a meeting with legal bigwigs of PML-N and discussed possible outcomes of the case. Law Minister Azam Nazir Tarar briefed the participants on the legal complexities in the case and the chances of the three-member apex court bench fixing responsibilities for violation of its March 1 verdict.
PML-N leader Malik Ahmed Khan said they would first try to convince the court that it should clarify the “ambiguity” surrounding its March 1 order in the suo motu proceedings. He said they would again demand that a full-court bench should be formed to hear the case to avert any controversy and if it was rejected, they would consider boycotting the court proceedings.
— Islamabad police limit entry —
The Islamabad police announced through its Twitter handle that visitors, who have to appear in cases or who have got special permission from the administration, would be entering the SC.
During the previous hearing, the request of the Attorney General for Pakistan to form a full court was rejected by the Supreme Court. In the case, the arguments of PTI lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar and Election Commission’s lawyer Sajeel Swati were completed. The Attorney General and caretaker government lawyers will give arguments during hearing today (Monday).
At the previous hearing, the chief justice had observed in his remarks that there would be important news on Monday. “We have shown restraint,” he remarked. The government would have to forget the past, he observed.
It should be noted that in the election case, the Pakistan Peoples Party, the PML-N and the JUI-F have requested to become parties and constitution of the full court.
A number of personnel representing the Islamabad police, Frontier Corps and Rangers have been deployed in and outside the Supreme Court.
— The federation’s plea —
The petition has requested the Supreme Court to dismiss the election delay case in view of the majority (4-3) order/judgment of March 1. It further stated that the proceedings in the instant petition may kindly be postponed in light of the order passed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa, postponing all the proceedings in suo motu matters.
“This Hon’ble Bench, in view of submissions made in paragraphs 11 and 12, may graciously recuse from hearing the instant petition and a bench comprising of all remaining Hon’ble Judges of this court, who did not hear SMC No. 1/2023, CPs No 1 and 2 of 2023, may kindly be constituted to decide the questions raised herein,” the plea requested.
— Lawyers express solidarity with CJ —
A good number of lawyers reached the SC after crossing hurdles and expressed solidarity with Chief Justice Bandial. PTI leader Azam Swati is also present. Some lawyers raised slogans in favour of judiciary on the arrival of judges.
— PTI slams govt for sabotaging constitution —
PTI leaders slammed the Shehbaz-led government for “attacking” the Constitution, pinpointing the PML-N for pressurising the country’s top court.
Speaking to reporters in Karachi on Sunday, PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi said the ruling coalition’s decision to file a reference against three SC judges was a signal to pressurise them.
— PDM likely to boycott SC hearing —
The ruling coalition partners have already announced boycotting the court hearing with demand to formulate a full bench to hear the case. The Attorney General for Pakistan will inform the court about boycott announced by the government.
— SC to be urged to clear uncertainty —
On Sunday, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif held a meeting with legal bigwigs of PML-N and discussed possible outcomes of the case. Law Minister Azam Nazir Tarar briefed the participants on the legal complexities in the case and the chances of the three-member apex court bench fixing responsibilities for violation of its March 1 verdict.
PML-N leader Malik Ahmed Khan said they would first try to convince the court that it should clarify the “ambiguity” surrounding its March 1 order in the suo motu proceedings. He said they would again demand that a full-court bench should be formed to hear the case to avert any controversy and if it was rejected, they would consider boycotting the court proceedings.
— Islamabad police limit entry —
The Islamabad police announced through its Twitter handle that visitors, who have to appear in cases or who have got special permission from the administration, would be entering the SC.