PTI reserved seats: CJP stresses importance of timely hearing review petition

Justice Isa argues judges should prioritise constitutional duties over personal convenience.

Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa stressed the importance of promptly scheduling review petitions regarding reserved seats, highlighting the constitutional right to a timely hearing. 

During the 17th meeting of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedures Committee, chaired by Justice Isa, a consensus emerged about the urgency of these cases.

Justice Isa argued that judges should prioritise constitutional duties over personal convenience, stating that delaying the hearing would be unjust.

He emphasised that the right to review is enshrined in the Constitution and should not be hindered by judges' vacations.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Muneeb Akhtar, however, contended that only the 13 judges who originally heard the case could conduct the review, noting that many judges are currently on summer break or abroad. 

They suggested that the review petitions be scheduled after the holidays.

Justice Isa opposed this majority decision, insisting that the hearings should proceed immediately, even if it meant cancelling the summer break. 

He cited the urgency stipulated in the Practice and Procedure Act, which requires review petitions to be scheduled within 15 days.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar pointed out that judicial rules allow for vacation periods, and once announced, they cannot be easily revoked. 

He added that the new judicial year starts in the second week of September, making it challenging to accommodate the review petitions immediately.

Chief Justice Isa warned that delaying the review petitions would render the cases ineffective and violate constitutional principles. 

He argued that awaiting a detailed decision while postponing the review hearings would strip individuals of their rights and undermine the law.

The committee ultimately decided, by a 2-1 majority, to schedule the review petitions post-holidays, despite Justice Isa’s dissent. 

He maintained that the delay would lead to a miscarriage of justice, stressing the need for immediate action to uphold constitutional integrity.