ISLAMABAD: A simmering divide within the Supreme Court has surfaced after two senior judges — Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar — rejected Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi’s explanation for not convening a full court on the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
The controversy reignited after the Supreme Court uploaded minutes of an Oct 31, 2024 committee meeting, along with two notes authored by the CJP, on its official website. The committee, formed under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023, had recommended that the petitions against the 26th Amendment be placed before a full court.
CJP Afridi, however, declined, citing concerns that a full court hearing might undermine judicial collegiality and expose the institution to heightened public scrutiny.
In a strongly worded letter, Justices Shah and Akhtar dismissed this reasoning as neither legally sound nor convincing. They stressed that the petitions remain unresolved and that the “golden opportunity” to address them before the full court — ensuring legitimacy and finality — had been lost.
The judges underlined that consensus on such a critical constitutional question could only emerge through collective deliberation in a full court, not through informal individual consultations. They accused the CJP of bypassing the committee’s binding decision, noting that their repeated efforts — including a protest letter when the cases were not scheduled on Nov 4, 2024 — were disregarded.
The letter further criticized the use of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) forum, arguing it was neither relevant nor empowered to override the committee’s lawful Oct 31 decision.
Finally, the judges objected to the unilateral publication of the committee’s records online, demanding their letter also be uploaded alongside those documents to preserve historical accuracy.
“If this is now for History to judge,” the letter concluded, “then let the record be complete.”
