Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has raised concerns for the second time over the issuance of a clarification by eight Supreme Court judges, which stated that the recent amendments to the Elections Act 2017 do not override the court’s July 12 ruling on reserved seats. In an office note, CJP Isa expressed regret over the issuance of the clarification and demanded explanations from relevant court officers.
The second clarification, authored by senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, emphasized that the Supreme Court’s July 12 order aimed to ensure proportional representation for political parties in reserved seats, as guaranteed under Article 51(6) and Article 106(3) of the Constitution.
In his office note issued on Saturday, CJP Isa highlighted that the clarification was released on October 18, while he was still drafting a judgment. Upon reviewing the case file, he found that the original clarification was not included. The assistant registrar (implementation) had sent letters to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) based on this clarification, prompting the CJP to summon explanations as to why the letter was issued before it was officially filed.
The court’s webmaster, Asim Javed, was also directed to explain why the second clarification was uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website on October 18, despite it not being filed in the official records.
This issue mirrors a similar incident from September 22, when CJP Isa questioned how an earlier clarification, dated September 14, had been uploaded to the court’s website. The clarification, authored by the same group of judges, had criticized the ECP for not implementing the court’s July 12 ruling, which affirmed PTI’s eligibility for reserved seats in parliament.
In a letter dated September 21, CJP Isa raised nine key questions, including who directed the clarification’s upload on the website, why no cause list or notices were issued, and how the order was made public without proper court procedures being followed. He also sought clarification on whether the applications were presented to the three-judge committee as mandated by the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023.
