Islamabad:
The Committee trained under the Practices and Procedure of the Supreme Court, 2023, rendered the office of the acting chief of Pakistan (CJP) by adopting a procedure.
The Committee – led by the chief judge of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi and including judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Judge Aminuddin Khan – May 29, did a new procedure to regulate his activities.
A notification in this regard has been issued by the Supreme Court registrar Muhammad Saleem Khan. The same notification was also downloaded from the Supreme Court website this week.
The notification indicated that the law of the Supreme Court (practice and procedure) 2023 transferred to the committee the powers of constitution of the benches and the powers which were exercised earlier by the CJP.
He declared that the law of the Supreme Court (practice and procedure) 2023 is not complete to cope with many eventualities such as emergencies and the absence of the CJP to be abroad. “It is necessary to regulate these voids not covered by the law of the Supreme Court (practice and procedure), 2023”. Consequently, in the exercise of the powers conferred by paragraph 2 of article 2 of the law of the Supreme Court (practice and procedure), 2023, the Committee did a procedure to regulate its activities.
The notification indicated that these procedures can be called the procedure of the Committee of the Supreme Court (practice and procedure), 2025 which will come into force at the same time.
Article 1 of the procedure stipulates that the president, the CJP, convenes the meeting of the committee as necessary, physically or by virtual means, for the end of the constitution and the reconstruction of the benches.
Article 2 of the procedure stipulates that a minimum of two members will constitute the quorum of a committee meeting. Article 4 indicates that the Committee will constitute and reconstruct the benches when necessary with regular intervals, preferably monthly or every two weeks.
“Once finalized and issued, no change will be made, except as provided for by these procedures. Any change in the constitution of the committee, including the change of president or a member, must not invalidate the constitution of the benches finalized by the committee, “he said.
Article 5 indicates that each time the President – the CJP – proceeds abroad or is not available to chair the meeting, it can constitute a special committee to deal with the questions relating to the reconstruction of the benches if one of the urgent situations arises as a sudden illness or the absence of a judge, the death or the challenge of a judge.
The special committee will be strictly limited to emergencies and will be recorded in writing, indicating reasons. Such a temporary modification will be reported to the committee at its next meeting.
Article 6 indicates that the registrar SC must maintain the recording of all meetings, decisions and modifications.
Article 7 indicates that these procedures have had a notwithstanding effect on the contrary contained in any other rule for the moment in force. Article 8 indicates that the Committee can modify these procedures from time to time, according to the necessary needs.
Some legal experts believe that article 5 of the procedure of practice and procedure of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court is contrary to the constitutional provision and that the aim of this procedure is to make the Office of the CJP in acting.
Former Lahore High Court judge Shahid Jamil said that rule 5 of the Supreme Court Committee procedure (practice and procedure), 2025, is in direct conflict with article 180, dealing with the appointment of the acting CJP, in particular when the superior judge is absent from Pakistan.
“It is the case for the president to appoint the acting CJP, who will be the most upscale judge in the Supreme Court. More importantly, the acting CJP will act as CJP in the absence.
Shahid Jamil said that rule 5 authorizes a special committee to examine, if the chairman of the committee is abroad or unavailable. “The law did not use the word president of the committee, only the CJP is made one of the members alongside the main judge of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Banc.
In the absence of the CJP, the most upscale judge, after the appointment as an acting CJP, would perform all the functions and exercise all the powers of the CJP, “he added.
Some legal experts have declared that the Committee led by the CJP Afridi had the exclusive power to decide on the cases which will be returned to the constitutional benches for decision.
However, the committee led by CJP Afridi and judge Shah and judge Khan were redundant because no regular meeting is held to discuss the constitution of the benches.
Sources revealed to L’Express PK Press Club that there was practically no meeting of the committee since the Afridi judge had taken care of the CJP. Perhaps there was only one committee meeting on May 29 in which the procedure was approved by the members of the committee.
Sources have indicated that there is no discussion or debate on how the cases are marked and the benches.
Some superior lawyers wonder why two senior judges have judged themselves as division benches while junior judges are among the benches of three members.
We learn that only the proposed list is sent to the members of the Committee for approval. During the mandate of CJP Afridi, no minutes of the committees meetings were downloaded from the SC website.
Speaking of the objective of the procedure, a lawyer said it was done mainly to introduce clause 5 in which it is developed that the CJP would form a special committee to deal with the questions in its absence.
He said the beneficiaries of the 26th constitutional amendment are very nervous to leave things in the hands of an acting CJP. “Under the current Constitution, judge Syed Masoor Ali Shah will be the acting CJP. They fear that judge Shah as an acting CJP will do everything that will create problems. ”
Judge Shah has worked as an acting CJP twice in the recent past. An article by lawyers wonders why judge Shah approved the procedure, which is contrary to the constitution. Maybe he did not react because clause 5 of the procedure is directly linked to him, said a lawyer.
