Top court still holds suo motu powers, says judge

Justice Mazhar says only the procedure has changed

ISLAMABAD:

A senior member of the newly formed Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court has observed that the apex court retains its power to take suo motu action. He said the 26th Constitutional Amendment has only altered the procedure for exercising this authority.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, who is a part of the six-member Constitutional Bench that initiated its proceedings a day earlier, made this observation on Friday. The bench was hearing a suo motu case related to terrorism.

During the proceedings, the counsel of the petitioner, Muneer Paracha, said there was no need for the court to hear the case as after the 26th Amendment, the SC could not initiate suo motu proceedings.

Justice Mazhar, however, took exception to this claim. Addressing the lawyer, he said after the amendment, only the procedure has changed and the Supreme Court can still take suo motu notice.

"The only difference is that now suo motu cases will go to a constitutional bench. Keep in mind that the constitutional bench can take suo motu notice," he added.

Another member of the bench, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, however, stated that the court will take up this issue later when someone will bring it to court. On Friday, the six-member Constitutional Bench led by Justice Aminuddin Khan heard a total of 16 cases.

The court also heard a case related to issuance of arrest warrants by a former federal ombudsperson against Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, while he was serving in the Lahore High Court (LHC). Justice Shah is now the SC's senior puisne judge.

In 2016, Justice Shah had stopped a former federal ombudsperson for protection against harassment of women at workplace, Yasmin Abbasi, to take action on a complaint. Abbasi had later served contempt notice on Justice Shah, while also issuing his arrest warrants.

The Supreme Court had later taken suo motu notice of the incident and suspended the arrest warrants. The former ombudsperson had later tendered an unconditional apology.

The bench gave the lawyer for the former ombudsperson more time to submit a reply. Justice Mandokhail asked as to why the court was pursuing the matter given the fact that Yasmin Abbasi was no longer the ombudsperson. Justice Mazhar noted that the matter had not yet been resolved.

The Constitutional Bench also directed the parties involved in the case regarding the establishment of an IT university in Islamabad to resolve the matter amicably.

Justice Mandokhail suggested referring the issue to the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC). However, the petitioner's counsel requested that the Supreme Court retain jurisdiction over the matter.

During hearing of the case, Justice Mussarat Hilali observed that it was her desire that the university be built and people get education.