ISLAMABAD, Oct 02 (APP):The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned hearing of the review petition pertaining to the interpretation of Article 63A till Thursday.
The court granted time to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) counsel to have consultation with the PTI founder in jail and also instructed the Attorney General for Pakistan to make arrangements in that regard.
A five-member larger bench presided by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Amin ud Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel and Justice Naeem Akhtar Aghan heard the review petition.
At the outset, the Registrar Office presented its report regarding the issuance of the detailed judgment in the case.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Shehzad Shaukat said that the detailed judgment was issued on October 14, 2022, and the review petition was filed with delay due to waiting of the order.
The delay could be ignored in a review petition pertaining to the matter of public interest, he added.
PTI’s Barrister Ali Zafar said that the PTI founder was the petitioner and he wanted to meet him in jail for consultation before giving arguments.
The chief justice observed that the lawyer should have told the court in that regard during yesterday’s hearing so that it could have issued an order the same day.
The CJP, addressing Barrister Ali Zafar, observed that how he could say that his (CJP’s) act was for certain reason. “How can you talk about my mind? I will not allow any judge or you to talk about my mind.”
He further remarked that the lawyer talked about assumptions, while his acts were very transparent.
“If a law comes in the full court meeting and everyone says it is a bad law. Will the law be abolished?” he questioned.
Chief Justice Isa rejected Ali Zafar’s objection on the formation of the bench, saying that he (the lawyer) had stated that the decision should be pronounced, “so we pronounced it. We all have a unanimous decision to reject the objection.”
Justice Mandokhail asked the lawyer to read the minutes of Judges Committee to view how many members were there.
The CJP said that there were simple constitutional questions. Whether many constitutional clauses including no-confidence move had become inactive because of the decision regarding the Article 63A, he asked.
Lawyer Ali Zafar said that the current bench could not hear the case without the judge who had written the decision. The said judge was not there to defend the decision.
He said that after rejection of the objections, he wanted to take instructions from his client whether to give further arguments or not.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) lawyer Farooq H Naek said that it was not a decision on Article 63A, rather it was an opinion on the presidential reference. It was not mandatory to implement that opinion like a decision, he added.
The court accepted the request of Barrister Ali Zafar regarding his meeting with the PTI founder and instructed the AGP to make arrangements on the same day.
مضمون کا ماخذ : Raging Rhino
