Connect with us

Pakistan

‘Need to review CJP’s one man show,’ SC two judges write dissenting note in election Suo Motu case

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Mandokhel have held that the top court cannot be left at the decisions of a single man, ruling that one man show is against the democratic principles.

Published

on

‘Need to review CJP’s one man show,’ SC two judges write dissenting note in election Suo Motu case
GNN Media: Representational Photo

Islamabad: Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Mandokhel have written a dissenting note in the case related to suo motu notice of the Chief Justice of Pakistan regarding elections in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab.

“We need to review the Chief Justice’s one man show,” said Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in his dissenting note.

Both Justice Shah and Mandokhel held that the Supreme Court cannot be left at the decisions of a single person.

They ruled that this is the right time that one man’s powers should be reviewed, holding that the role of chief justice as a one-man show should be ended now.

“One man has the huge powers which could harm the independence of the institution,” the judges ruled, pointing out that one man’s show of the chief justice was against the democratic principles.

They held that the role of the chief justice must be regulated.

Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission of Pakistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor and other parties to submit replies by tomorrow (Tuesday) on petitions challenging delay in elections of the Punjab and Khyber Pakthunkhwa.

The PTI, Sheikh Rashid and others filed the petitions and submitted that the ECP postponed the elections of Punjab from April 30 till Oct 8.

They said the ECP committed contempt of court by postponing the elections. The government, they said, was also responsible as they did not assisted the ECP in conducting elections.

The petitioners asked the court to take actin against the ECP and others for delaying elections, violating the court orders and the Constitution.

Trending