CJP says ‘We will try to conclude Practice and Procedure case today’

Islamabad: The hearing on nine petitions filed related to the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023 has started Tuesday, which is being covered live by the government TV.

After assuming office, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa scheduled the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act for hearing before the full court and for the first time in the history of the Supreme Court, the hearing was telecasted live.

Today's hearing

In the Supreme Court, the full court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa is hearing the petitions, in which the Chief Justice said at the beginning of the hearing that we will try to conclude the case today, we cannot sit on just one case. Already there are many pending cases in the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice stated: “Today the effect of this law will be especially on the Chief Justice and two senior judges. The powers are not being lessened rather shared. This law will also apply to future Chief Justices. The authority of the Chief Justice and the authority of the Parliament are face to face. Some judges believe that the power of the Parliament and the Chief Justice is face to face, some do not think so”.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa added that all of you have submitted your written responses. We have the Attorney General and senior lawyers in front of us, will listen to everyone.

During the hearing, Ikram Chaudhry read out the news about the former prime minister, on which the Chief Justice said that he should not read the news that has nothing to do with this case. Do not use the court for political discussion, the media is there for it. Give legal arguments about how Parliament has taken away the right of judiciary.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa continued to say that some people also think that Supreme Court and the Parliament have come face to face with this law. I will not use the word ‘war’. The Supreme Court Practice and Procedure act has now become law. The bill was never enacted into law. If Parliament could have enacted the legislation or not, we should not go into the debate for it. Tell us if Supreme Court practice and procedure is inconsistent with the Constitution or not.

The Chief Justice further said that when the court can see the constitutional amendment, repentance is over. Your argument is that it becomes a law through the constitutional amendment, then it is fine. When you talk about the independence of the court, is this independence a rare thing or is it for people? The independence of the court is only for its own that it has to be defended at all costs. Isn’t the independence of the court is for the people? Highlight the point that if Parliament makes a law in future to give priority to widows' cases, will this legislation affect the independence of the Judiciary?

He continued to say: “The legislation is smoothing and making the path of justice difficult, so tell me, is our freedom enough or is it related to someone else”? Parliament and Judiciary are separate constitutional institutions.

If you have not requested action under your right to access information, then do not give this argument. You have not written a letter to the Speaker yourself and want the entire Supreme Court to sit and listen to baseless arguments, said Chief Justice.

During the hearing, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that the court should be independent for access to justice, first tell us how the fundamental right of access to justice is affected by the act. We have come a long way from making the applications admissible.

In the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked: “When martial law is imposed, everyone throws down their weapons. There are many images posted in this courtroom of people who forgets the oath when martial law is imposed. If martial law is imposed, the oath is forgotten, if parliament does something, everyone remembers the oath. Even then bring petitions against martial law, why don't you come there? This court has upheld martial law many times, Parliament said the Supreme Court's powers were extended, Parliament said they made the right legislation, Supreme Court's use of 184 (3) affected the fundamental rights of the people in the past”.

The Chief Justice asked the lawyer that what is your problem with getting the right to appeal in revision? On this, lawyer Hasan Irfan said that my right to access the law will be affected, there will be social and economic effects in future.

Justice Qazi Faez said: “I know the language of reality and not assumptions, whether you start with Maulvi Tamizuddin or Nusrat Bhutto who said that you can play with the constitution as much as you want, but not with Pakistan. Parliament should be respected.”

The Chief Justice further said that a ‘single person’ has destroyed this country. Whether there is martial law in single person or whatever, we have to decide among ourselves. What is your problem with the judges? A Chief Justice made a decision, it was right for you, if more make the decision than it becomes wrong. Do not understand how this law is for one person, everyone is just attacking the parliament, see if the law is good for the people or not.

Watch hearing live here: