Justice Mandokhail questions if judges can hear 26th Amendment case as its ‘beneficiaries’
ISLAMABAD: Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail on Monday wondered whether judges comprising the Supreme Court’s (SC) Constitutional Bench (CB) hearing petitions against the 26th Amendment could do so if they were its “beneficiaries”.
The Amendment was passed by the parliament during an overnight session in October last year, with the PTI claiming seven of its lawmakers were abducted to gain their favour as the party opposed the legislation. The Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M) also alleged its two senators were being, with both later defying party line to vote in the tweaks’ favour.
The legislation, which altered judicial authority and tenure, has been a lightning rod for debate with both opposition parties and legal experts questioning its impact on the judiciary’s independence.
The tweaks took away the SC’s suo motu powers, set the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s (CJP) term at three years and empowered a Special Parliamentary Committee for the appointment of the CJP from among the three most senior SC judges. It also paved the way for the formation of the CB, which is now hearing petitions against the very legislation that enabled its establishment.
Former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Abid Shahid Zuberi continued his arguments on the case on Monday.
The CB hearing the pleas is headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan and also includes Justices Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan.
At the outset of the hearing, Justice Mandokhail questioned whether it was the right of any party to request a bench of its choice, to which Zuberi replied, “I do not think that any party has the right to select a bench of their choice. But here the case is that we are requesting a full court on some constitutional legal issues.”
The ex-SCBA president added that he had “always insisted that there should be a full court”.
Justice Mandokhail then asked why Zuberi wanted a full court, to which the latter said he would cite the former’s past judgements in favour of the formation of a full court. The hearing was then adjourned till 11:30am today (Tuesday). Monitoring Desk
