PDM is trying to limit powers of Chief Justice !

[JackTheRipper]

 

[uhuru]

Looks like your politicans are trying to do Netanyahu stunts....

At least in Isreal, people have gone to the streets.

 

[villageidiot]

Looks like your politicans are trying to do Netanyahu stunts....

At least in Isreal, people have gone to the streets.

Difference being, it's not just the politicians. They wouldn't dare do any of this shit. They don't even have public support behind them.

 

[AZ1]

thing is its already took notice and case is in proces, cant implement it on running cases.

May implement in future

https://twitter.com/x/status/1640725064571138053

 

[villageidiot]

thing is its already took notice and case is in proces, cant implement it on running cases.

May implement in future

https://twitter.com/x/status/1640725064571138053

Yes, can't apply it retrospectively. Although they might try.
But, that will open a pandora's box, as the Suo Moto on Qasim Suri's reuling was also a one-man show and funnily enough, Mandokhel who complained about the one-man show was also in that bench.

 

[HerbertPervert]

Ironically, this may help PTI and Pakistan in the long run. Judicial activism in Pakistan was destructive, even managing private enterprise like hospitals, blocking privatization of PSM, etc. The judiciary was untouchable, you couldn't even question judgements without being slapped with contempt of court charges. Judiciary needs to be cut down to size.

 

[Imran Khan]

HUnger of money and power make them blind

 

[Sugarcane]

It's Cheap of Sicilian mafia whose powers needs to be curtailed, I hope that if PTI comes to power with enough majority, they should amend the constitution and reduce powers of property dealers.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1640754436157976576

 

[Jango]

I do not think the assembly can do this. It needs a constitutional amendement. Can they?

 

[M. Sarmad]

I do not think the assembly can do this. It needs a constitutional amendement. Can they?

They cannot amend the constitution unless two-thirds of the membership of both houses vote in favor of the amendment bill separately. So, they are instead amending the rules that regulate the practice and procedure of the Supreme Court. But again whether or not the parliament/legislature has that authority is debatable as such an action would be in apparent contradiction with the article 191 of the constitution

 

[Jango]

They cannot amend the constitution unless two-thirds of the membership of both houses vote in favor of the amendment bill separately. So, they are instead amending the rules that regulate the practice and procedure of the Supreme Court. But again whether or not the parliament/legislature has that authority is debatable as such an action would be in apparent contradiction with the article 191 of the constitution

Hmm.

Anyways if they do this it won't affect the current case.

And besides, any judge that says that elections can be held after 90 days on such flimsy reasons needs to be given a mental checkup anyways.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Hmm.

Anyways if they do this it won't affect the current case.

And besides, any judge that says that elections can be held after 90 days on such flimsy reasons needs to be given a mental checkup anyways.

Yes, such rules cannot be applied retrospectively. This is a well established legal principle

But everything is possible in Pakistan. As we saw during Musharaf's trial, the article 6 was amended in 2010 (words suspension/holding in abeyance were added) and then it was applied retrospectively to Musharaf's declaration of emergency in 2007

Delaying general elections beyond 90 days (after the dissolution of an assembly) is a clear violation of the constitution and I doubt that any SC judge could say otherwise. They would rather try to hide behind technicalities and use every legal loophole

 

[Jango]

I doubt that any SC judge could say otherwise. They would rather try to hide behind technicalities and use every legal loophole

Thing is, judges are themselves trying to play into this, and I have no doubt with malafide intentions.

One other thing to note, the judge who wrote the order (Mandokhel) yesterday in the hearing itself told the AG that this is their internal matter (the 4-3 issue) and to let the SC handle it, AG should only discuss the merits of the case at hand.

Jab pallay kuch na ho to isi tarah oliyan boliyan marni parti hain.

 

[ghazi52]

,.,..,

Govt tables bill in NA to limit CJP’s suo motu powers​

The bill states that a committee of three senior-most SC judges will decide on taking up any suo motu case

Khalid Mehmood/Hasnaat Maik
March 28, 2023

The federal government tabled a legislative bill in the Natonal Assembly on Tuesday seeking to curtail the discretionary powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, leaving the decision of taking up any suo motu case to the three senior-most judges of the apex court.

Federal Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar presented 'The Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023', which was approved by the federal cabinet earlier in the evening. NA Speaker Raja Pervez Ashraf subsequently referred the tabled bill to the NA's Standing Committee on Law and Justice for its approval.

Sources told The Express Tribune that a meeting of the standing committee has been summoned for Wednesday (tomorrow) at 10pm to take up the matter. The committee is expected to swiftly approve the judicial reforms bill, after which the it will be sent back to Parliament.

Seeking to curtail the discretionary powers of the chief justice, the judicial reforms bill states that "every cause, appeal or matter before the Supreme Court shall be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by the Committee comprising the Chief Justice of Pakistan and two senior most judges, in order of seniority,"

The decisions of such a committee shall be by majority, it adds.

Regarding suo moto powers, the bill seeks to ensure that any matter invoking exercise of original jurisdiction under Article 184 (3) shall be first placed before the committee of three senior-most judges.

“..If the Committee is of the view that a question of public importance with reference to enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II of the Constitution is involved, it shall constitute a bench comprising not less than three judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which may also include the members of the Committee, for adjudication of the matter,” it adds.

The legislation also allows appeals within 30 days of a verdict being issued on a suo motu case and enforces that a bench be constituted to hear such an appeal within 14 days.

“An appeal shall lie within thirty days from a final order of a bench of the Supreme Court who exercised jurisdiction under clause (3) of Article 184 of the Constitution to a larger bench of the Supreme Court and such appeal shall, for hearing, be fixed within a period not exceeding fourteen days,” read the draft.

The development comes amid a growing debate in the country over the discretionary powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan to constitute benches, 'fix' cases, and initiate public interest proceedings under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif urged the National Assembly to legislate on reducing the powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, stating that the voices from within the judiciary were a 'new ray of hope'. The premier said that history would not forgive the National Assembly if it did not pass the legislation.

Addressing the NA session, the prime minister read out a dissenting order issued by Supreme Court judges Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah on a suo motu case over the delay of elections to the Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa assemblies.

On Monday, the two dissenting judges of the apex court had issued a 27-page order, stating that the suo motu case regarding the Punjab and K-P elections date announcement had been dismissed by a majority of four judges out of seven.

The 27-page 'order of the court' by the two dissenting judges was in stark contrast to the Supreme Court's earlier order which had ruled in a 3-2 verdict that polls in K-P and Punjab be held within 90 days.

In the order, the judges also called for "revisiting the power of the one-man show enjoyed by the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan” in order to “strengthen” the institution and “ensure public trust and confidence” in the apex court.

 

[Jango]

,.,..,

Govt tables bill in NA to limit CJP’s suo motu powers​

The bill states that a committee of three senior-most SC judges will decide on taking up any suo motu case

Khalid Mehmood/Hasnaat Maik
March 28, 2023

The federal government tabled a legislative bill in the Natonal Assembly on Tuesday seeking to curtail the discretionary powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, leaving the decision of taking up any suo motu case to the three senior-most judges of the apex court.

Federal Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar presented 'The Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023', which was approved by the federal cabinet earlier in the evening. NA Speaker Raja Pervez Ashraf subsequently referred the tabled bill to the NA's Standing Committee on Law and Justice for its approval.

Sources told The Express Tribune that a meeting of the standing committee has been summoned for Wednesday (tomorrow) at 10pm to take up the matter. The committee is expected to swiftly approve the judicial reforms bill, after which the it will be sent back to Parliament.

Seeking to curtail the discretionary powers of the chief justice, the judicial reforms bill states that "every cause, appeal or matter before the Supreme Court shall be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by the Committee comprising the Chief Justice of Pakistan and two senior most judges, in order of seniority,"

The decisions of such a committee shall be by majority, it adds.

Regarding suo moto powers, the bill seeks to ensure that any matter invoking exercise of original jurisdiction under Article 184 (3) shall be first placed before the committee of three senior-most judges.

“..If the Committee is of the view that a question of public importance with reference to enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II of the Constitution is involved, it shall constitute a bench comprising not less than three judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which may also include the members of the Committee, for adjudication of the matter,” it adds.

The legislation also allows appeals within 30 days of a verdict being issued on a suo motu case and enforces that a bench be constituted to hear such an appeal within 14 days.

“An appeal shall lie within thirty days from a final order of a bench of the Supreme Court who exercised jurisdiction under clause (3) of Article 184 of the Constitution to a larger bench of the Supreme Court and such appeal shall, for hearing, be fixed within a period not exceeding fourteen days,” read the draft.

The development comes amid a growing debate in the country over the discretionary powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan to constitute benches, 'fix' cases, and initiate public interest proceedings under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif urged the National Assembly to legislate on reducing the powers of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, stating that the voices from within the judiciary were a 'new ray of hope'. The premier said that history would not forgive the National Assembly if it did not pass the legislation.

Addressing the NA session, the prime minister read out a dissenting order issued by Supreme Court judges Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah on a suo motu case over the delay of elections to the Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa assemblies.

On Monday, the two dissenting judges of the apex court had issued a 27-page order, stating that the suo motu case regarding the Punjab and K-P elections date announcement had been dismissed by a majority of four judges out of seven.

The 27-page 'order of the court' by the two dissenting judges was in stark contrast to the Supreme Court's earlier order which had ruled in a 3-2 verdict that polls in K-P and Punjab be held within 90 days.

In the order, the judges also called for "revisiting the power of the one-man show enjoyed by the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan” in order to “strengthen” the institution and “ensure public trust and confidence” in the apex court.

Technically, and holistically speaking, this is a good thing.

BUT, there is no doubt there are malafide intentions here.

And, this wouldn't apply retrospectively, but N propaganda would definitely try and make this the bigger issue rather than the elections.

I just don't understand, suo motu agr na bhi hota, to PTI would have gone to the court with a petition. Baat to wohi thi. Secondly, the dissenting judges dissented on the maintainability of the suo motu because case was already being heard by high court, not that elections can be dragged past 90 days.

Govt and N league should stop sidestepping the actual issue and talk about elections.