Sept 24, 2024
By Rehan Piracha and Rana Malhi
LAHORE:
In the wake of a three-page letter from senior Supreme Court judge Mansoor Ali Shah, expressing dissatisfaction with changes to the bench-forming committee, senior lawyers warn that the country may be on the brink of another constitutional crisis.
The bench-forming committee was reconstituted through the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Ordinance 2024 on Sept 20 that enables the chief justice of Pakistan to nominate a third senior judge, alongside himself and the second-most senior judge of the court.
In response, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah wrote a letter to Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa on September 23, stating that he would not participate in the three-judge committee meetings until the constitutional validity of the amendments was determined by a full court or the judges of the apex court resolved to act upon the amendments in a full court meeting.
The letter conveyed Justice Shah’s disagreement with the amendment and exposed divisions within the Supreme Court. Amid the growing tension, Voicepk.net reached out to prominent legal experts across the country to gather their insights on the friction within the judiciary.
When judges are labelled with political affiliations, they cease to be effective judges: Ranjha
Khalid Ranjha, former law minister, said that the public perception of the judges’ impartiality has shifted over the decades. In the 1950s, people demanded a judicial inquiry at the level of a civil judge while in the next decades that changed to an inquiry deemed more respectable of a high court judge, he told Voicepk.net.
In the previous two decades, he added, an inquiry by a Supreme Court judge became the most acceptable in the public eye.
Noting the division between the apex judiciary over the recent verdict of reserved seats and Justice Shah’s dissatisfaction with changes to the bench-forming committee, Ranjha said the apex court must align itself with what is just – “When judges are labelled with political affiliations, they cease to be effective judges”.
In his view, the lawyers and the public viewed the recent amendments reforming the composition of the bench-forming panel with suspicion. “The mechanism for averting any constitutional crisis between the apex judiciary, the executive, and the legislature is already outlined in the constitution. “A good parliament is the one that makes laws keeping the constitution in view. But if you decide to go through legislation with the might of your numerical superiority, disregarding the constitution, then the parliament becomes controversial,” he explained.
Any attempt to subjugate the judiciary should be unacceptable to public: Abid Saqi
Abid Saqi, former executive chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council, said the Supreme Court has become fractured which is evident from the dissenting ruling of two minority judges in the reserved seats case. The minority judges wrote that the judgment of the majority members should not be implemented, he added.
“Any attempt to subjugate the judiciary should be unacceptable to the public and judges on the bench,” Saqi said.
Parliament doesn’t have powers to amend salient features of the constitution: Tariq Khokhar
Tariq Mahmood Khokhar, former additional attorney general, was of the view that the judgment, authored by Justice Mansoor in the reserved seats case, related to the interpretation of the constitutional provisions. “The only two ways to overrule the SC verdict is either through a judgment by a larger bench or a constitutional amendment,” Khokhar said.
However, he cautioned, “the parliament doesn’t have powers to amend salient features of the constitution.”
Country is gearing towards a constitutional crisis of the govt’s making: Abdul Moiz Jaferii
Abdul Moiz Jaferii, lawyer, said the country is gearing towards a constitutional crisis entirely of the government’s own making. “The government is the only player here which can avert the crisis by stopping its contempt of Supreme Court orders,” he told Voicepk.net in response to a question about how the crisis can be resolved.
In his view, the Supreme Court is working perfectly within its constitutional mandate – “It is the executive and the legislature which is transgressing or threatening to transgress on the independence of the judiciary.”
He added that there is no need to create a balance between parliamentary supremacy as a lawgiver and judicial independence. “The parliament should stop playing into the hands of the agenda of unelected actors in a desperate attempt to cover their own illegitimacy,” he added.
We’re back to the stage where CJP’s opinion will matter more than his peers: Salman Akram Raja
Salman Akram Raja, counsel for the opposition Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaaf, praised Justice Shah for abstaining from the committee. “We are back to the stage where CJP’s opinion will matter more than his peers,” Salman Akram Raja told reporters outside the Supreme Court in Islamabad on September 24.
Hamid Khan, former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, slammed the promulgation of the presidential ordinance that reconstituted the Supreme Court committee. Talking to reporter on the ordinance’s constitutionality, he said that the reconstitution of the Supreme Court bench-forming committee is “illegal and unconstitutional“.