SC’s Justice Manzoor Malik retiring today

Supreme Court Judge Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik, who is retiring on Friday (today), will be remembered for a long time for his role in Justice Qazi Faez Isa case.

Hailing from Punjab, Justice Malik was appointed as the Lahore High Court (LHC) judge in 2009. He was elevated to the position of the LHC chief justice, and in November 2015, to the Supreme Court.

Justice Malik is known for his command over criminal law and deciding the cases expeditiously. It is learnt that he decided 50,000 cases as judge of the high court and Supreme Court.

Commenting on his services, former Pakistan Bar Council vice chairman Abid Saqi observed that Justice Malik was much admired in the bar. He lauded Justice Malik’s decision to change his earlier opinion in Justice Qazi Faez Isa case.

Saqi believed that the independence of judiciary would be “secured” due to Justice Malik’s contribution. Likewise, he observed that the United Nations (UN) praised his ruling in mentally ill prisoners’ case.

Justice Manzoor Malik dissenting note

A day before his retirement, Justice Malik issued a 10-page dissenting note wherein he differed from majority (five) judges opinion that the dissenting judges while hearing the review petition ought to show “maximum restraint and quietude” while sitting on the bench hearing the review.

Earlier, a six-member larger bench led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial offered certain guidelines, explaining how dissenting judges ought to act if they were called upon to sit in a review of a majority judgment.

However, a member of the bench Justice Malik disagreed with majority opinion and maintained that he was unable to set his hand on any provision of the constitution and the Supreme Court Rules that limited the jurisdiction and judicial power of a minority judge while sitting in review of the order of the bench or order of the court as against those judges who had delivered the majority judgment.

"In my humble view, the observation given in Para 28 of the Order that ‘the Judges who dissent with the majority judgment ought to show maximum restraint and quietude’ while sitting on the bench hearing the review, may give an impression of undermining the judicial independence of other judges", said Justice Malik.

The apex court judge said that indeed, the grounds for review were limited and applied equally to both the judges who rendered the majority view and the judges who rendered the minority view.

"In this backdrop, with utmost respect, I do not and cannot persuade myself to subscribe to the observations and findings of my learned brothers given in Para 28 of the Order."

Justice Malik also observed that the term “master of roster” used in Para 22 of the Order could not be understood to mean that the chief justice of the country had unfettered discretion regarding constitution of benches.

"In fact, the discretion vested in the office of the CJ for constitution of benches is to be exercised in a structured manner according to the Supreme Court Rules SCR," said the order.