SC rules 1980: Lawyer challenges CJP’s ‘unfettered powers’
Plea takes issue with powers over constitution of benches, fixing of cases ‘at CJP’s discretion’
PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
A lawyer has challenged various Supreme Court rules which give unfettered powers to Chief Justice over constitution of benches and fixation of different cases at his discretion.
Advocate Ali Azim Afridi has filed a constitutional petition under Article 184 (3) of the constitution. The petitioner contends that Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules of 1980, to the extent of allowing constitution of benches and nomination of the judges single-handedly by the CJP, is ultra vires of the constitution.
Likewise, he contends that Order V and III are also ultra vires of the constitution to the extent of allowing appeals to be heard in chambers. “The allowance of such powers and that too solely in the office of CJP impinges upon the notion of independence of judiciary”, he said. “Even otherwise, single-handed use of powers by the CJP stands in violation of Article 191 read with Article 176 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan”.
The petition contends that unbridled use of powers by the top judge of the apex court allows misuse, abuse of power and authority; restricting the scope of formulating independent opinion within the Supreme Court.
“The self-styled use of powers impairs the code of conduct laid down in pursuance of Article 209(8) of the Constitution.” It is further contended that allowance of cherry-picking in cases would ultimately lead to distrust of the public in the judicial institutions.
CJP Saqib Nisar summons former CMs over provincial woes
The petition further reads that the constitution nowhere confers special status on CJP under the garb of rules regulating the practice and procedure of Supreme Court.
“Allowing respondent No.2 (SC registrar) so as to raise irrelevant/unnecessary/shallow objections; hearing of appeals in chambers, so as to impede the use and scope of Article 184(3); rendering judgment in per-incuriam to the detriment of people of Pakistan and in violation of the Constitution.
The lawyer submitted that the issue at hand is of public importance as it involves questions with regard to independence of judiciary; examination of vires of certain orders of the SC Rules of 1980 on the touchstone of constitutionality and law; allowing respondent No.1 single-handed use of unbridled powers in constitution of benches; fixation of cases for hearing; allowance of respondent No. 2 seeking directions of respondent No. 1, in every cause/appeal/matter pending or coming up for consideration before the Apex Court; in violation of Article 191, 175 read with Article 176 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The petitioner stated that Supreme Judicial Council be directed for fixation of the reference/complaint against CJP with necessary directions for its completion within a specified time.
A lawyer has challenged various Supreme Court rules which give unfettered powers to Chief Justice over constitution of benches and fixation of different cases at his discretion.
Advocate Ali Azim Afridi has filed a constitutional petition under Article 184 (3) of the constitution. The petitioner contends that Order XI of the Supreme Court Rules of 1980, to the extent of allowing constitution of benches and nomination of the judges single-handedly by the CJP, is ultra vires of the constitution.
Likewise, he contends that Order V and III are also ultra vires of the constitution to the extent of allowing appeals to be heard in chambers. “The allowance of such powers and that too solely in the office of CJP impinges upon the notion of independence of judiciary”, he said. “Even otherwise, single-handed use of powers by the CJP stands in violation of Article 191 read with Article 176 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan”.
The petition contends that unbridled use of powers by the top judge of the apex court allows misuse, abuse of power and authority; restricting the scope of formulating independent opinion within the Supreme Court.
“The self-styled use of powers impairs the code of conduct laid down in pursuance of Article 209(8) of the Constitution.” It is further contended that allowance of cherry-picking in cases would ultimately lead to distrust of the public in the judicial institutions.
CJP Saqib Nisar summons former CMs over provincial woes
The petition further reads that the constitution nowhere confers special status on CJP under the garb of rules regulating the practice and procedure of Supreme Court.
“Allowing respondent No.2 (SC registrar) so as to raise irrelevant/unnecessary/shallow objections; hearing of appeals in chambers, so as to impede the use and scope of Article 184(3); rendering judgment in per-incuriam to the detriment of people of Pakistan and in violation of the Constitution.
The lawyer submitted that the issue at hand is of public importance as it involves questions with regard to independence of judiciary; examination of vires of certain orders of the SC Rules of 1980 on the touchstone of constitutionality and law; allowing respondent No.1 single-handed use of unbridled powers in constitution of benches; fixation of cases for hearing; allowance of respondent No. 2 seeking directions of respondent No. 1, in every cause/appeal/matter pending or coming up for consideration before the Apex Court; in violation of Article 191, 175 read with Article 176 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The petitioner stated that Supreme Judicial Council be directed for fixation of the reference/complaint against CJP with necessary directions for its completion within a specified time.