ISLAMABAD, Jan 27 (APP):The Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued notices to parties for formation of a full court after the initial proceedings in appeals against the 26th Constitutional Amendment and has adjourned the hearing for three weeks.
An eight-member Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, headed by Justice Amin ud Din Khan and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayhesha A Malik, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Shahid Bilal Hasan was hearing the initial arguments.
The petitioners were not unanimous on formation of a Full Court, however the majority wanted it. Justice Jamal Mandokhial, to the plea of formation of full court remarked that all members of the constitutional bench will be part of the Full Court and some petitioners may object to their presence. The bench can’t be constituted as desired by the parties but as found fit by the Judicial Commission.
He further observed that judges for the bench are nominated by the Commission while cases before the benches are fixed by the three member committee. The Chairman and the two members of the Committee, all the three members are part of the Constitutional Bench.
Justice Amin ud Din Khan offered the lawyers, who have observation about the Constitutional Bench that they can leave the floor for those who are willing to argue in support of their petitions.
Advocate Faisal Siddiqui pleaded before the Court that the 26th Amendment has damaged the trichotomy of power. He said that the Upper House of the parliament had no representation from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and was unable to pass a constitutional amendment.
Advocate Aziz Bhandari argued that the parliament was incomplete when such an important constitutional amendment was passed. Voting took place among the available members instead of all members of the National Assembly. Advocate Imran Shafiq argued before the Court that the principal of seniority for appointment of the Chief Justice of Pakistan is replaced and now a judicial commission, with representation from the Executive has an effective say in the process, decides the appointment of CJP.
Barrister Salahuddin pleaded before the Court that circumstances for free and fair voting were not suitable and the statement of a senior parliamentarian from Balochistan Muhammad Akhtar Mengal is evidence among many that undemocratic means were used to pass the amendment. He further stated that the house was without the women and minority MPs on reserved seats and incompletion of the House was established.
The Court did not agree to the opinions of petitioners for the formation of a full court, issued notices to the respondents and adjourned the hearing for three weeks.
