Bandial had sought increase in number of SC judges: CB
ISLAMABAD: The constitutional bench Thursday revealed that in fact former Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial had asked for increasing the number of judges in the Supreme Court.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel divulged that while responding to the arguments of Hamid Khan that more judges were inducted in the Supreme Court (SC) so they be included in the constitutional bench for hearing of review petitions against the SC's judgment on reserved seats.
Hamid Khan, representing the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), contended that was the reason the judges, who passed the majority judgment, including the author judge, were excluded from the bench. He also complained of not fixing review petitions against the majority judgment, which was delivered on July 12, 2024, before the enactment of 26th Constitutional Amendment.
8-member bench to hear pleas against SC bill
Justice Mandokhel said; 'According to my information, request for increasing judges in Supreme Court was from former chief justice Umar Ata Bandial.' Justice Amin, explaining reason for delay in fixation of review petition, said because of two members of the Committee, set up under Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023, the reviews were delayed.
Justice Amin further said after the 12th July judgment, when review petitions were filed then former Chief Justice (Qazi Faez) called a Committee's meeting to decide about hearing of review petitions. However, two members [Justice Mansoor and Justice Munib] at that time said were on summer vacations.
Hamid Khan then contended that the review petition should have been heard after a decision on 26th Constitutional Amendment. Justice Mandokhel responded that review petition was filed prior to petitions against the 26th Amendment.
An 11-member Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the review petitions of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples' Party (PPP) and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). The proceeding was live-streamed on SC's YouTube channel.
At the onset of the proceeding, Justice Mandokhail inquired from PTI lawyer; 'Don't you think 3-day, time-line given in Article 51 of the constitution, has been extended in 8-judge's verdict.'
Salman Akram Raja, appearing on behalf of PTI, replied, 'no'. He submitted that the judgment actually allowed the independents to join a political party to that they belonged. He told that the judgment derived power from Section 66 of the Election Act, which states how a candidate becomes a member of a political party.
Raja also contended that after 24th December 2023, the ECP refused to recognise PTI as a political party, and declined to issue list of PTI reserved seats for women.
Justice Mandokhel reminded Raja that in the main case, he had accepted the status of PTI candidates as independents, and admitted that he would not have any objection if the reserved seats were given to the SIC. Raja recalled that during the proceeding of the main case, Justice Athar Minallah raised issue of complete justice and asked won't he has objection if reserved seats were given to the PTI. The counsel said that he had bowed to that offer, adding the 8-judge judgment declared that joining of SIC by independents is nonest.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that there is nothing on record that 41 candidates, out of 80, filed party affiliation certificate or mentioned PTI in their nomination papers. Justice Salahuddin Panhwar remarked that if 39 independents could mention in their nomination papers PTI, then why 41 candidates did not write PTI. He questioned whether they had the fear that if they would do that than their papers would be rejected. Justice Mandokhel observed had the 41 candidates also mentioned PTI in their nomination paper then maximum damage they could face was the rejection of the papers.
Justice Muhammad Hashim Kakar questioned whether Section 94 is still part of Elections Act? Raja replied that he went to the Lahore High Court (LHC) against this provision, but the High Court dismissed it without passing any order, and remanded the matter to the ECP. Raja informed that he had challenged that order before the apex court, but the registrar's office returned his petition on 2nd February 2024. He told that the majority judgment declared the Explanation in Section 94 ultra vires of the constitution.
Justice Mazhar inquired whether Section 94 was declared ultra vires in the short order or the judgment. Raja responded that in paras 4 and 5 of the majority judgment it was clarified why Section 94 was declared ultra vires.
However, Justice Mazhar noted that there is no such declaration in the short order. He said once a thing is not considered in the short order then how come finding on it could be given in the detailed reasoning, adding this is a legal question, as it will come before the Court in future.
The case was adjourned until Friday (June 27).
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business Recorder
PTI says budget will enrich elite at the cost of masses in Pakistan
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Friday launched a scathing attack on the recently passed Federal Budget for 2025-26, denouncing it as a 'banker's blueprint' crafted to enrich the elite at the expense of the masses. Speaking at a presser, the opposition leader in National Assembly Omar Ayub, flanked by Asad Qaiser, Gohar Ali Khan, and other senior party leaders, condemned the budget as a 'giveaway written by a banker, for his banker buddies'. 'This is not a people's budget; it's a banker's business plan,' Ayub said. 'The hybrid regime plans to borrow another Rs6,300 billion from local banks, allowing four or five bank owners to graduate from billionaires to trillionaires. Meanwhile, the nation sinks deeper into debt.' Ayub accused the government of both fiscal cruelty and political repression, warning that the prices of essential commodities such as flour, sugar, and lentils would soar under the new fiscal measures. 'They couldn't even face the opposition in Parliament. Both the finance minister and the prime minister evaded accountability.' Moreover, Ayub claimed that former MNA Ijaz Chaudhry was abducted in the dead of night, while former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi remain in jail as hostages of political vendetta. He said several senior PTI leaders including Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Omar Cheema, Hassaan Niazi, and Yasmin Rashid and others were imprisoned without bail. However, Asad Qaiser accused the government of reducing Parliament to a rubber stamp. MNA Sanaullah Mastikhel criticising the powerful energy lobbies, alleged that Independent Power Producers (IPPs) were 'untouchable profiteers' who have plundered the nation for decades under successive governments. 'These IPPs have become a cartel, bleeding the country dry through inflated capacity payments and ironclad contracts. They get paid whether they produce electricity or not while the average Pakistani is left in the dark, both literally and financially.' Masti accused the government of shielding these corporate giants while the public suffers from rolling blackouts and sky-high electricity bills. 'Every time the people tighten their belts, these energy barons loosen theirs. And now, with this budget, the same crooks are getting even more incentives. It is daylight robbery, institutionalised.' He demanded an open audit of all IPP contracts and called for a complete overhaul of the power sector. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
6 hours ago
- Express Tribune
SL court stops state land grab from Tamils
Sri Lanka's top court halted Friday a government move to acquire land in northern regions still reeling from the consequences 16 years after the end of a decades-long civil war. Sri Lanka's north bore the brunt of the conflict in the 37-year-long Tamil separatist war, which was brought to a bloody conclusion in May 2009. Many among the Tamil minority lost their land title deeds during the years of displacement, and the area was also hit by the 2004 Asian tsunami. The Supreme Court order concerning nearly 6,000 acres (2,428 hectares) of land came a day after UN human rights chief Volker Turk ended a three-day visit, during which he urged the authorities to return private lands still occupied by troops. The UN estimates that at least 100,000 people died in the war, and that 40,000 of them from the Tamil minority were killed by troops in the final months of the conflict.
Express Tribune
7 hours ago
- Express Tribune
'Dark moment in our history'
Listen to article The PTI has strongly condemned the Supreme Court's verdict in the reserved seats case, calling it a violation of constitutional and democratic principles. In a statement released by PTI's Central Media Department on Friday, Imran Khan's party described the verdict as a "continuation of state oppression" and "a robbery of the public mandate". Once again, the constitutional right of the PTI has been looted through a judicial bench, it said. The statement noted that the Supreme Court had previously ruled in PTI's favour, recognizing its entitlement to the reserved seats but it has now contradicted that stance. The statement added that this verdict tramples the spirit of justice, the people's vote, and the right to representation. "The PTI presented constitutional points and legal arguments before judicial forums for months, but it has become evident that the courts exist only to serve the elite." The PTI alleged that the reserved seats were distributed "like spoils of war" among parties that lacked public support, calling it a blatant mockery of democracy. It went on to say: "This verdict marks one of the darkest days in Pakistan's constitutional history. First, the electoral process was attacked, the bat symbol was taken away, party workers were arrested, and now the public mandate has been rejected." Calling the current system "devoid of public, constitutional, and democratic values," the PTI declared that this is now a system where speaking the truth is a crime, demanding rights is rebellion, and voting for Imran Khan is an unforgivable sin. "We may be disappointed by the courts, but not by the people. And we know that in the end, victory will belong to truth, the Constitution, and Imran Khan," it stated. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif welcomed the decision. In a statement, he congratulated the government's legal team and appreciated it for the tireless work. He said the correct interpretation of the law in the decision established the supremacy of the Constitution and law. He urged the opposition to work together with the government and play its positive role for development and prosperity of the country.
