CJP says AGP's advice should be taken in review law

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Friday said that law related to the scope of review should be framed carefully with the advice of the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) as he has experience in litigations.

The CJP wondered whether a review could be merged with an appeal as he expressed reservations about the newly introduced Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023.

"Some grounds should be added for reviewing the judgments given under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution," the chief justice said, "otherwise, that would mean rehearing the case."

Nonetheless, the CJP said that the court would welcome the decision to provide a remedy in judgments decided under the original jurisdiction provisioned by Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

In May, a three-member bench headed by CJP Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar was hearing the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) review petition against its April order with regard to elections in Punjab when the AGP revealed that a new law enlarging the scope of review petitions had been enacted.

Subsequently, the apex court decided to hear the petitions filed against the review law together with the poll authority’s review plea.

Read Can a united judiciary reassert itself?

During the proceedings today, AGP Mansoor Awan defended the new law and said that review jurisdiction is altogether different as it posits that the original bench members would be included in the bench reviewing the case.

"When a high court decides a case, there are other appellate forums, including the intracourt appeal," the AGP argued, "even the SC could be approached against a high court's decision".

"However, when the SC decides a case under Article 184 (3), then is it the first judicial forum," he said stressing the need for the possibility to file a review plea.

"Under Section 3 of the new law, a larger bench will hear the case which will include the original three judges who initially heard the case," he stressed.

However, the CJ remarked that such provisions were "against the basic principles", before adding that "we can resolve this matter. Your opinion should have been accounted for in the review law for Article 184 (3)."

"We have not even come to the main question yet: How far can the review power be extended? They want to introduce provisions for review but on what grounds should the review be requested?" the CJ questioned.

"Your case is that there is overlap between the new laws," said Justice Ijazul Ahsan while referring to another law, the SC (Practice and Procedure) Bill, 2023, which curtailed the top judge’s powers to initiate suo motu proceedings and constitute benches on his own choosing.

"There is a contradiction here," remarked Justice Munib Akhtar referring to how similarities in the laws.

AGP Awan defended the case saying "as we speak, there is only one law because the other one stands suspended."

Subsequently, the court adjourned the proceedings until Monday (June 19).