ISLAMABAD: A three-judge committee formed under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 has announced that it will address the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) petition to recall the July 12 short order in the reserved seats case after the summer recess. This decision aims to ensure the presence of all 13 judges involved in the original ruling at the principal seat in Islamabad.
The committee’s 17th meeting on July 18 revealed a notable dissent. Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa disagreed with the majority opinion held by senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar. CJP Isa emphasized that the constitutional right to review should take precedence over the convenience of judges on leave. He argued that urgent hearings of review petitions should be prioritized, even if this means reopening the court or canceling vacations.
In contrast, Justice Shah and Justice Akhtar supported the majority view, citing Order 26, Rule 8 of the Supreme Court Rules 1980, which requires that review petitions be presented before the same 13-judge bench that initially heard the case. They recommended scheduling the hearing after the summer recess due to the ongoing vacations and the absence of many judges. They also highlighted that review petitions could not proceed until the detailed judgment on the reserved seats was released, which was still awaited.
Justice Akhtar pointed out that summer vacations are stipulated under Order 2 of Rule 3, which dictates the court’s annual calendar, beginning on the second Monday in September and ending with the summer break.
CJP Isa, in his dissenting note, raised concerns about the potential irreparable loss if the July 12 order’s operation was not suspended. He stressed that the delay in releasing the detailed judgment could render the review petition moot if not heard within the stipulated 15 days.
CJP Isa also underscored that Section 7 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 mandates that applications seeking urgent relief should be heard within 14 days of filing. He argued that delaying the detailed judgment could undermine the constitutional right to a review and the law’s requirement for an urgent hearing.
The CJP also noted that 26 months have passed without resolving the review petition against the interpretation of Article 63A of the Constitution. He urged that the petition be scheduled for hearing within the next 10 days, including Justice Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, and Justice Aminuddin Khan on the bench.
I am an accomplished graduate of Strategic Studies, driven by a fervent dedication to comprehending global affairs and devising impactful strategies. Equipped with a comprehensive skill set encompassing research, critical thinking, and persuasive communication, I possess a distinctive viewpoint and an unwavering commitment to fostering inclusive decision-making processes. As a versatile individual, I excel in collaborating with diverse groups in various settings, leveraging my strong interpersonal abilities to adapt seamlessly to new environments and surmount any challenges that arise. With a passion for contributing to strategic initiatives, I am eager to leverage my expertise and drive to effect positive change within the field.
