For the first time in the history of the country, all 15 judges of the Supreme Court proceed live
ISLAMABAD: For the first time in the history of the country, all 15 judges of the Supreme Court of Justice (Practice and Procedure) of the Court of First Instance to telecast a proceeding live on a set of petitions to be heard in 2023. Allowing a law to regulate the suo motu of the country’s highest judge.
The Full Court headed by Supreme Court V of Pakistan (CPP) Qazi Faiz Isa will respond to the petitions which will be aired live on Television T at that time.
The court declared Fil Uzma’s petitions admissible on the petitions.
During the court contest, Ibn Isa said, “I will start the arguments anew because I will be a Niach.”
The court has said that the full court applications should be approved by you
Before the court today, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Usman Awan submitted the ruling government’s response in this Mansoor, allowing the court to plead to dismiss the petition against the Court Practice and Procedure Act.
“The request for petitions against parley proceedings is not entertained.”
The court confirmed to Geo News that the decision was taken earlier by the trial court.
For this purpose, courtroom number one was sent to five. They were installed in all four galleries and one was installed in front of the judges’ booths for the lawyers’ rostrum.
Phil’s court was reconstituted by Judicial Qazi Faiz Isa and included Sardar Tariq Masood, Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Manzar Syed Ali Shah, Manzar Muneeb Akhtar, Manzar Mansoor Afridi, Aminuddin Khan, Syed Mazahir Ali Akbar, Jamal Khan Mandukhel, actor. Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Exhibition O Malik, Manzar Athar Min Allah, Exhibition Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed Naqvi and Duniya Musrat Hilali.
It has been ruled that the proceedings will be broadcast live today and that those who are concerned about the first decision of the trial will be judged in the court. According to the license, the instruction for live broadcasting continues a few hours after the swearing-in to watch for tomorrow’s exhibition.
Upon his arrival, the vehicle for the exhibition Jesus – who confirms in person without the protocol – the court said: ” The court said: ” The court said: ” The court said: ” to communicate with the court We interact with attendees. ”
He further said that the channels of justice should be kept open.
Hearing
There are nine applications, at the beginning of the hearing, the Chief Justice made remarks and requested Advocate Khawaja Tariq Rahim to start arguments.
The Chief Justice asked Vakil Rahim to read the Act and forget the past.
Justice Ayesha asked the lawyer that if the law is upheld, what will be the effect of Section 5 which gives the right to appeal?
“Given that the full bench will hear the case. Will the appeal not be heard?”
“Parliament constituted a three-judge committee to decide on matters of public interest,” Rahim said, referring to the Practice Act.
Justice Mandukhel asked what Article 191 of the Constitution says.
“The Constitution empowers Parliament to legislate,” Khawaja said, adding that the Supreme Court made its rules through the full court.
While reading the Act, Justice Mansoor remarked that I understand your point that if all this is done by the full court then it is acceptable, if Parliament does it then it is wrong.
Justice Musarat inquired whether the powers of the Chief Justice could be abolished by legislation.
On this, Justice Mandukhel asked whether the powers of the Chief Justice or the Supreme Court were terminated by the legislation.
Are you satisfied that the Chief Justice has unlimited power to form a bench? Justice Athar questioned while both Chief Justice Isa and Justice Mazhar requested Advocate Rahim that which provision of the law the petitioner had objected to and which article of the Constitution this law contradicted.
Can’t three judges sit and interpret the constitution? he pointed out. However, the Chief Justice replied that the legislation is only talking about the number and not the qualifications of the judges.
As several relevant questions were raised regarding the power and authority of Parliament, the Chief Justice reiterated that advocates should raise questions and answer them later.
“My colleagues are asking you good questions,” he told the lawyer to take his time answering them.
Further, the CJP reprimanded counsel Rahim for citing his “personal opinion” during the arguments and asked him to stick to the law.
The Chief Justice said what is this ‘personal opinion’, please discuss the law.
He further asked whose right can be taken away by this law.
He remarked that ‘6.5 billion dollars was lost by the court’s decision in the Rekodic case, as the Chief Justice I do not want such an authority’.
He claimed that the Parliament had interfered with the Supreme Court rules.
Justice Athar asked if you support what happened in the past.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice asked the lawyer to comment on whether he considered the entire law to be wrong or a few clauses.
“As per Schedule 4 of the Federal Legislative List, the Supreme Court makes its own rules and procedures,” replied the lawyer.
Was this power given to the Supreme Court in the Constitution or in the law? Justice Mandukhel inquired.
Advocate Rahim said that he will answer the questions later.
Justice Athar then asked whether it is not within the purview of Parliament to make this law.
Background of the case
On April 13, an eight-judge bench of the Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the law, which deals with the chief justice’s powers in matters of public interest and seeks to limit the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s autocratic powers.
During the last hearing in June, the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023 – which deals with the right of appeal in automatic notice cases – and the SC Practice and Procedure Act discussed with the Attorney General for Pakistan. went. (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan says Parliament can review the “harmonization” of the two laws.
The then Chief Justice welcomed the proposal and said that the federal government should take the Supreme Court into account while enacting any legislation related to the judiciary.
Law
The law empowers a three-member committee comprising senior judges including the Chief Justice to take suo moto notice. It further aims at transparent proceedings in the Supreme Court and includes the right of appeal.
Regarding the constitution of benches, the Act provides that every cause, matter or appeal before the Supreme Court shall be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by a committee consisting of the Chief Justice and the two most senior judges. had gone
It further said that the decisions of the committee will be taken by majority.
Regarding the exercise of original jurisdiction by the Supreme Court, the Act stated that any matter invoking Article 184(3) shall first be placed before the Committee.
On matters requiring interpretation of the Constitution, the Act stated that the committee would constitute a bench consisting of not less than five judges of the Supreme Court.
As regards an appeal from any decision of a Bench of the Supreme Court exercising Article 184(3) jurisdiction, the Act stated that an appeal shall lie to a larger Bench of the Supreme Court within 30 days of the order of the Bench. It further states that the appeal shall be fixed for hearing within a period of not less than 14 days.
It further stated that this right of appeal would also extend retrospectively to the aggrieved persons against whom an order under Article 184(3) was passed before the commencement of the SC (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023. Provided that an appeal was made. To be filed within 30 days of the commencement of the Act.
The Act also provides that a party shall have the right to appoint counsel of his choice to file a revision petition under Article 188 of the Constitution.
Further, it states that an application seeking urgency or seeking interim relief filed in any cause, appeal or matter shall be heard within 14 days from the date of filing
