Islamabad:
A cold war in the highest judicial power seems to have deepened while the higher judge of the then, judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, could not fly to Saudi Arabia for having attended two events Arbitration for lack of ex-Pakistani leave.
We learn that judge Shah was invited to deliver key notes during two events during the arbitration week in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia organized by the Al Baraka Forum and the organization of the Islamic Cooperation Center- Arbitration (OIC-AC).
During the week, judge Shah also wanted to play the Omra before the start of the sacred month of Ramazan.
The judge of the senior then made a request to the chief judge of Pakistan Yahya Afrida for an ex-Pakistan in time, which remained unanswered and forcing the judge Mansoor to cancel his trip to Saudi Arabia because his holidays could not not be sanctioned.
It should be noted that judge Shah was the only judge of the Supreme Court of a Muslim country invited to the event sponsored by the Saudis in the “Arbitration Week” in Riyadh, which is a high -level event.
Lawyers believe that arbitration is the most important for Pakistan, and the presence of Shah judge in Riyadh would have helped strengthen cooperation between the magistrates of Muslim countries. This could have led to developing a joint arbitration center for Muslim countries and an international arbitration center in Pakistan.
They also wonder for which the committee’s report working under the Practice and Supreme Court procedure are not shared on the SC website. The practice was stopped since the outgoing CJP took its office.
J. Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is also a member of the three members’ committee. Earlier, four judges, who opposed the elevation of judges from the High Court to the Supreme Court, were removed from the main administrative committees of the CJP Yahya Afridi restructuring plan.
CJP Afridi has reconstructed several committees, replacing senior judges with junior judges. People excluded from critical roles included judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Judge Munib Akhtar, Judge Ayesha Malik, judge Athar Minallah and judge Aqeel Ahmad Abbasi.
If the CJP Afridi had formed a full court to hear petitions against the 26th constitutional amendment, the situation could have been different, the legal experts said.
Two judges, judge Mansoor Ali Shah and judge Munib Akhtar, who trained the majority of the committee concerned, had ordered the constitution of a full court to hear the petitions during the first week of November. However, instead of listing the case, CJP Afridi summoned a meeting of the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) to select the judges of the Constitutional bench. The constitutional bench has not yet decided for petitions against the 26th constitutional amendment.
Subsequently, a bench of three judges led by judge Shah had raised the question of whether the ordinary bench could be prohibited to rule on questions related to the interpretation of the law and the constitution after the 26th constitutional amendment. However, the case was removed from this regular bench by the committees.
A division bench of the Supreme Court led by judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah judged that the members of the two committees had violated the judicial order and withdrew the case of the regular bench. The bench pointed out that members of the committees committed contempt; Consequently, the full court should be formed to initiate the procedure.
However, the members of the constitutional bench were visibly upset and put aside the judicial orders of the regular bench. Recently, the federal government has also filed intra-distribute calls against regular outrageous bench orders.
It is seen that the dissident judges have been confronted at times that are still difficult since the mandate of the ex-CJP Saqib Nisar.
Lawyers believe that if the confrontation between the superior judges of the SC continues, the higher judiciary will be still weakened and the situation will be favorable to the beneficiaries of the 26th constitutional amendment.
