SC convenes for the fourth time over Practice and Procedure Act

ISLAMABAD: The full court bench of the Supreme Court, presided over by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, has convened for the fourth hearing of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act case.

The case has garnered significant attention due to its implications for the hierarchy between rules and acts in the legal system. It has also managed to get significant public interest due to live coverage on national TV.

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) lawyer Faisal Siddiqui asserted his commitment to examine whether the Rules could override the Act. He called attention to the Baz Muhammad Kakar case, stating that some parts of its decision were directly related to the Act and its subsequent amendments.

Supreme Court debates legislative powers in live full-bench hearing

Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa directed a pointed question at Siddiqui, asking if they had filed any submissions in the court. In response, Advocate Siddiqui confirmed that he had not filed any submissions but expressed his intent to address the court’s inquiries comprehensively.

Continuing his argument, Advocate Siddiqui reiterated MQM’s full support for the Act. He delved into the intricate legal nuances, drawing attention to the term “Act of Law” and the extensive scope of the word “law.”

Justice Ayesha Malik chimed in, emphasising that the term “law” in Article 191 gave Parliament the authority to legislate and clarified that “law” encompassed Acts of Parliament and other legal provisions.

As the justices appeared eager to question the lawyers, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa intervened, instructing them to allow the lawyers to conclude their arguments before posing questions. The Chief Justice’s directive aimed to ensure that the arguments were not left incomplete.

The courtroom saw its fair share of back-and-forth exchanges, with Justice Muneeb Akhtar seeking clarification on the meaning of “law” in Article 191 and Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa reminding him that any decisions should be reflected in the judgment.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan contributed to the discussion by asserting the Supreme Court’s authority to make rules under Article 191, underlining the constitution’s centrality in rule-making processes. He raised a question about whether Parliament’s rule-making infringed on Supreme Court matters.

Army major among two soldiers martyred, five terrorists killed: ISPR

Advocate Siddiqui highlighted the existence of a dedicated section for defining words in the Supreme Court Rules, further deepening the legal discourse.

As questions from the bench continued to emerge, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa reiterated his preference for allowing lawyers to complete their arguments before engaging in questioning. The courtroom remained charged with tension and excitement.

Amid the intense legal sparring, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa also cautioned against laughter during proceedings and voiced concerns over case delays, urging judges to withhold their questions until the completion of the lawyers’ arguments.