The Supreme Court has suspended the decision of the Lahore High Court and the Election Commission's notification regarding the formation of election tribunals following an appeal by the Election Commission.
According to a Private News Channel, the Supreme Court suspended the Election Commission's notification dated April 26.
The Supreme Court's order stated that consultation would only be possible after the appointment of the new Chief Justice. The issued notifications by the Election Commission are suspended, and the consultation should be conducted transparently. Once the appointment of the Chief Justice is completed, the Election Commission should immediately proceed with the consultation.
The order further stated that until the next hearing, the Lahore High Court's decision and the issued notifications would remain suspended, and the case is kept pending.
The hearing on the formation of tribunals was conducted by a five-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, with Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Mandokhail, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Justice Aqeel Abbasi included.
At the beginning of the hearing, the lawyer for the Election Commission argued that the formation of election tribunals is the Election Commission's prerogative.
At this point, PTI leaders raised objections against the Chief Justice of Pakistan. PTI lawyer Niazullah Niazi stated that they wanted to record their objection and requested the case be sent to another bench.
The lawyer contended that his client objected to the Chief Justice being part of the bench and requested the case be transferred to another bench. In response, the Chief Justice remarked that their objection had been heard, and they should sit down as the Election Commission's lawyer was presenting arguments.
The Chief Justice asked PTI lawyer Salman Akram Raja why no objections were raised at the first hearing when they were asked if there were any objections, to which they replied there were none. He suggested sending Niazullah Niazi's case to the Pakistan Bar Council. Salman Akram Raja clarified that he did not personally raise the objection.
The Chief Justice further questioned whether they were sitting there to be insulted, emphasizing that he did not form the bench but that it was formed by the committee.
The court became angry over the objections raised against the Chief Justice and the bench formation, with the Chief Justice stating that they had had enough and would refer the matter to the Pakistan Bar Council. He highlighted that those who raised objections did not have any at the time of becoming a party. He pointed out that no objections were raised when he was part of the two-member bench initially.
Justice Qazi Faez Isa remarked that raising objections against the bench was intended to create headlines. Justice Jamal Mandokhail asked lawyer Niazullah Niazi to explain why he had objections now when he didn't initially.
Subsequently, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa commented on the need to end the humiliation of the judiciary and considered whether to take action against such behavior.
Later, the Election Commission's lawyer Sikandar Bashir began his arguments, stating that the Election Commission requested to become a party in the case. The court had issued a notice to the Attorney General for assistance in the last hearing and accepted the Election Commission's request to become a party. The court also sought records of tribunal formations in other provinces.
Justice Aqeel Abbasi remarked that the February 15 letter from the Election Commission should be submitted as it was crucial. He asked the Election Commission's lawyer about the meaning of requesting a panel of judges and if it could have been obtained from the website. He questioned whether the Chief Justice was bound by the Election Commission's preferences and if the Election Commission could issue directives to the Chief Justice.
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa emphasized that only the relevant Chief Justice knows which judges are available and highlighted the importance of transparent consultation between the Election Commission and the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court.
The Election Commission's lawyer responded that a letter requesting a meeting had been sent to the High Court Registrar but no response had been received yet. The Chief Justice suggested resolving the matter through consultation between the Chief Justice and the Chief Election Commissioner.
Justice Aminuddin commented that consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court is mandatory, even if an amendment is approved. The court inquired if the Election Commission was prepared to meet with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail asked whether the Election Commission had requested panels in Islamabad and other provinces as well. He pointed out that there might be judges already present in certain areas who could handle the tribunal's responsibilities.
The court emphasized the importance of cooperation between constitutional institutions to avoid the country's destruction and sought clarity on the Election Commission's stance regarding rejecting the names provided by the Chief Justice.
The Supreme Court eventually indicated that the matter of tribunal formation would be left to the consultation between the Election Commission and the Lahore High Court and reserved the decision on the Lahore High Court's order regarding tribunals.
The court stated that it would consider the impact of suspending the order on the consultation process between the two institutions and concluded by noting that further consultation among the judges was necessary. The Attorney General was asked to expedite the parliamentary committee meeting to address the issue.
The Supreme Court underscored the importance of respecting the powers of each institution while maintaining a cooperative approach.
In the background, it is noted that on June 20, during the Supreme Court's hearing on the Election Commission's appeal against the Lahore High Court's decision on tribunal formation, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa remarked that relying on ordinances undermines Parliament's role. The Election Commission had challenged the Lahore High Court's decision in the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the formation of eight tribunals ordered by the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court on June 12.
Posts
0 Comments