First-ever live broadcast of Supreme Court of Pakistan’s full-bench hearing begins

ISLAMABAD: “Apologies for the delay in starting the hearing”, Chief Justice Qazi Faezs Isa said while initiating the proceedings. “The reason for delaying the hearing was to show it live,” he said.

He said that there are nine applications in the Supreme Court regarding Practice and Procedure Bill case. There were three applications for constituting a full-bench on the matter as well, including one from the Bar Council.

The SC is deliberating the act and why it was struck down by the previous chief justice.

Keep the doors of justice open; treat visitors like guests

“Who will give the arguments in the Supreme Court on Practice and Procedure Bill case?” the Chief Justice inquired, while directing that the arguments may be kept limited.

There are some people who have not heard the matter, he said, “The best solution to resolve the case was to make a full court on it”.

It is not written anywhere that Parliament’s powers are unlimited, the bench noted.

It has to be seen whether under the Federal Legislative List Parliament can legislate for the Supreme Court, Khawaja Rahim said, adding that it is the Supreme Court that can set its own rules and regulations. He said that the Supreme Court makes its own laws according to Article 191. The parliament intervened in the Supreme Court’s rules, he added.

Was the whole law wrong or just some clauses? the chief justice’s asked Khawaja Rahim.

“Can a single individual be given unlimited unaccountable power?” inquired Justice Athar Minullah, “How is regulating the powers of the Chief Justice a violation of fundamental rights?”

My argument is that the law is good but the procedure was wrongly adopted, lawyer Imtiaz Siddiqui said.

Justice Athar Minallah replied, “so clipping the unaccountable powers of the chief justice to decide on the benches is good, but if it is decided by the parliament then it is not okay. Is that your point?”

Judiciary itself should have regulated the powers, lawyer Imtiaz said. He added, “This law cannot be passed by Parliament, full court can do it”.

The independence of the judiciary cannot be taken away under any circumstances, Khawaja Rahim said, to which Justice Athar responded with “Do you want to say that the bench powers of the Chief Justice are valid?”

Parliament is supreme, we respect it, we cannot disrespect it, Justice Muneeb Akhtar added. He said, “The constitution says that independence of judiciary is a fundamental right, can parliament remove this right?”

Is the law of making a committee related to bench formation giving judicial power or administrative power? Justice Muneeb inquired, saying that “Can Parliament legislate on executive powers?”

The provision of a bench of at least 5 judges in constitutional cases was also included in the legislation, Khawaja Rahim said. In my view, Section 7 is against the Constitution and the law, he added.

There was interference with the bill, if this continues, the Supreme Court will not remain the Supreme Court, lawyer

Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa said, “I have objection to the provision you object to.” If the Parliament had attacked our rights, we would have taken notice, the Chief Justice remarked. In our hundreds of questions, the real defendant will be lost, he added.

The Chief Justice said, I will present you with a hypothetical. You bring a case and the Chief Justice does not want to hear it. For instance, this case that you brought me today, if I say I do not want to hear the case, then what?”

“Along with internal freedom, accountability and transparency are also important, he said, adding, “Independence of the judiciary does not mean that a case should not be heard for ten years.

“Be accountable to Allah before the Constitution”, Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa said. He said that the law offering the sole Chief Justice with the powers to whether accept a case or not is too much power. “Even if you give me such authority, I will not take it, which will expose the ego of the Chief Justice,” he said.

After conclusion of arguments by Khawaja Rahim, lawyer Imtiaz Siddiqui continued with the arguments in front of the full bench court. The Chief Justice inquired from Siddiqui, “What are the constitutional points which show that these Acts are illegal?”

So far, no word has been heard as to which provision of the Constitution the Act is in conflict with, he added. Chief Justice said, “Whether the law is good or not, we will not disrespect the Parliament”.

It is happening all over the world that no one person has authority anywhere, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said.

This is a developing story.