SC declares PTI ineligible for reserved seats
ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court with the majority of seven set aside the impugned judgment dated 12th July 2024, on the reserved seats of women and non-Muslims.
The 10-member bench on Friday after hearing the arguments of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) counsel, Attorney General for Pakistan, and the lawyer of women parliamentarians, elected on the tickets of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Peoples' Party (PPP) on reserved seats, passed a short order, the detailed reasoning would be announced later.
Initially, a 13-member Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A Malik, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Justice Shahid Bilal Hasan, Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, was constituted for the hearing of review petitions.
On the first hearing, held on May 6, 2025, 11 judges of 13-member bench accepting the review petitions issued notices to the respondents. However, Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi rejected the petitions, and wrote separate note, while Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, at the verge of conclusion recused from the bench for certain reasons.
According to the short order, majority of seven judges – Justice Amin, Justice Musarrat, Justice Naeem, Justice Shahid, Justice Hashim, Justice Aamer and Justice Baqar Najafi – allowed all Civil Review Petitions, and set aside the impugned majority judgment dated 12.07.2024, as a consequence thereof, Civil Appeal Nos 333 of 2024 and 334 of 2024 filed by the SIC are dismissed and the judgment rendered by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar is restored.
The order further stated that Justice Mandokhail partly allowed the review petitions and maintained his original order with regard to 39 seats, but reviewed the majority judgment to the extent of 41 seats.
Whereas Justice Muhammad and Justice Azhar also reviewed the judgment and allowed the review petitions with the rider that since the factual controversy or disputed questions of facts neither could be resolved by the Peshawar High Court nor this Court in original or review jurisdiction; therefore, directions are issued to the ECP to examine and consider the nomination papers/ declaration and other relevant documents of all 80 returned candidates by means of de novo exercise with regard to their affiliation and take appropriate decision in accordance with law and applicable rules for allocation of reserve seats within 15 days from receiving the copy of this Short Order.
A Full Court of 13 judges on July 12, 24, delivered five separate short orders. Eight judges – Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A Malik, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan declared that 39 out of 80 MNAs on the list were elected candidates of the PTI, and to 41 independents granted 15 days' time to decide on joining the PTI.
Former Chief Justice Qazi and Justice Mandokhel in their order also accepted 39 candidates of the PTI, but considered 41 as independents. Justice Yahya Afridi though recognized PTI as political party, had directed the ECP to decide the allocation of reserved seats for women and non-Muslims to political parties in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies. On the other hand, Justice Amin, and Justice Naeem had rejected the SIC appeal against the PHC verdict.
Onset of the proceedings, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar addressing Hamid Khan, lawyer Sunni Ittehad Council, said that he had good relation with him. 'However, you raised objections on the bench yesterday (Thursday).'
He then read his written statement, which stated; 'In the entire proceeding of this case all the counsels including Faial Siddiqui, Salman Akram Raja unequivocally expressed confidence in the bench. However, yesterday Hamid Khan during the course of his arguments raised objections on the bench, especially targeting the inclusion of the judges, including me, who were appointed judges of the apex court subsequent to the 26th Amendment, questioned the propriety of our participation in the adjudication of this case.'
He stated: 'Dignity and impartiality of the Court remained unchallenged throughout these proceedings, and there was broad consensus among all the parties, thus reflected faith in the bench. Judicial propriety and the appearance of impartiality remain paramount in maintaining the public confidence in the judiciary.
'In light of the objection raised and in deference to the principle of judicial propriety, irrespective of its merit, and the timing of the assertion I consider it appropriate to rescue myself from the hearing of this case. The recusal is made not from the admission or disqualification, but to uphold the dignity of the institution and integrity and objectivity of these proceedings, I thereby recused myself from the bench.'
When Justice Salahuddin Panhwar finished his statement, Hamid Khan said: 'Greatly appreciated.' However, Justice Amin responded; 'This is not the matter of appreciation', adding: 'this is because of your conduct.' While addressing Hamid Khan, the judge further said that you are the third counsel of the same party, whom we gave an opportunity to argue in this case.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said; 'In a case two counsels from the same party are never allowed, but we respected you as a senior counsel; therefore, provided you opportunity to argue the case; otherwise you were not entitled,' adding; 'You have misused it.'
After the recusal of Justice Salahuddin the members of the bench left the courtroom, and approximately 30 minutes later the 10-judge bench resumed the hearing.
Hamid Khan emphasized that the review petitions should be heard by the same numerical strength bench that had delivered the judgment. He then referred the case of Justice Qazi Faez Isa, where a reference was filed against him in the Supreme Judicial Council.
He submitted that a 10-member bench was hearing the review against the SC judgment by the 10 judges. However, in the middle of the hearings Justice Faisal Arab retired the then chief justice; therefore, included another judge (Justice Amin) in the bench hearing the review petitions of Justice Faez.
Hamid then contended that under Article 191A of the constitution the constitutional benches are constituted by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan, which is dominated by the executive members.
Justice Mandokhail told that this arrangement was due to 26th Amendment. He then asked from the SIC council do you accept the 26th Amendment? Then he told him to move on his next point. Hamid reacted; 'Do you stop me from arguing my case'.
Justice Mandokhail told him that 'you have 10 minutes to make your argument; otherwise, sit down.' Hamid replied: 'You are angry, do not hear the case just now.'
The conversation continued in a confrontational manner, with Justice Mandokhail telling him to sit down if he does not want to present his arguments.
'I know how to do my job, you should be careful with your words,' Justice Mandokhail said. 'I have skipped my mother's funeral to be here and you are joking.' He said the bench would not hear anything irrelevant and had already heard enough. 'We consider you a good lawyer, but what you are doing right now is not the job of a professional lawyer,' he added.
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
10 hours ago
- Business Recorder
SC's ruling on reserved seats strengthens hybrid system: JI
LAHORE: Chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Hafiz Naeem ur Rehman has said that the Supreme Court's ruling on reserved seats has further strengthened the hybrid system, depriving people of their democratic rights. 'The verdict is regrettable and based on a flawed interpretation of the Constitution,' he said in a statement issued from Mansoora on Sunday. The decision of constitutional bench, he said, has once again raised serious questions about the credibility of the judicial system. He added that the 26th Constitutional Amendment allowed powerful quarters to bring the judiciary under complete control. 'Ruling elites are now using courts to get favorable decisions. Jamaat-e-Islami had vehemently opposed the 26th Amendment and outrightly rejected it, while some opposition parties became a part of it.' The JI leader said had the opposition taken a principled stand, at least some credibility of the courts might have been preserved. Commenting on the implications of the verdict, he said it remains to be seen how both the government and opposition parties respond. 'Will they accept PTI's rightful seats as spoils of war or adopt a moral, principled, and democratic position by refusing to take them?' he asked. He remarked that for Pakistan's so-called political parties, democracy is nothing more than a tool for personal gain. 'Political parties must correct their direction and prioritize democratic values over personal interests. Only then can rule of law and constitutional supremacy be established in the country,' he stated. He emphasized that the people themselves must now rise for their rights through peaceful resistance—and that Jamaat-e-Islami offers the most credible platform for such a struggle. Meanwhile, Rehman expressed deep sorrow over the tragic drowning of tourists in the Swat River and extended condolences to the bereaved families. He criticized the government for failing to respond in time, saying, 'Authorities watched helplessly on TV as children and women were swept away by the current. A helicopter could have reached them from Islamabad in just 30 minutes—or even less from Peshawar. But while the ruling elite can immediately deploy helicopters and jets for personal use, the citizens of this country are left to die without help.' He held the ruling class responsible for monopolizing national resources and failing to provide even basic facilities to the common man. 'The people have been abandoned. The government has failed to protect lives,' he said. He pointed out that the PTI has been in power in KP for over 13 years, yet the Swat tragedy once again exposed its incompetence. He demanded that all illegal encroachments — especially those on riverbanks—and unauthorized hotels in tourist areas must be immediately removed to prevent future disasters. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
10 hours ago
- Business Recorder
‘JI will resist compromise on Kashmir'
RECORDER REPORT: Chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Hafiz Naeem Ur Rehman has said that if the government and the establishment compromise on Kashmir to appease Trump, the nation will resist. He said the govt & opposition are engaged in politics of personal gain rather than principles and both come together like close allies when it comes to serving their own interests. He said they are united on Bajwa's extension & on increasing their own salaries. In Karachi, establishment prevented JI from having its mayor elected & imposed PPP mayor instead, he said. Those who trade Kashmir for business and dollars will be made a lesson by the nation, he said and added despite being repeatedly deceived by India, the rulers continue to fall for its traps. Hafiz Naeemur Rehman expressed these views during the concluding address at a training session for party workers from Sheikhupura and Nankana districts, held at Mansoorah, Lahore. He said the American stooges have halted work on the Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline, while Iran has already completed its part. Had the rulers truly cared about the people's hardships, the Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline would have been completed by now, and oil would also be imported from Iran, he said. Hafiz Naeemur Rehman stated that mega corruption scandals have already emerged in KP and Punjab, while Sindh has long been self-sufficient in corruption. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the PTI government is in its 12th year, yet there is still no proper rescue system for those who drown in the Swat River. Politics has been hijacked by feudal lords, landlords, and capitalists. They come to power with the support of the establishment, and when they lose power, they start criticizing it, he elaborated. He said that Pakistan is facing a governance crisis. The entire judicial system is held hostage. Fake verdicts are obtained from the Supreme Court to serve political interests. Through a shameful decision, the Supreme Court distributed reserved seats among the ruling alliance, even though those seats rightfully belonged to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), he said. Now it remains to be seen whether those who talk about principled politics will accept these seats or not, he added. He added that Jamaat-e-Islami's mandate was stolen in the general elections. Several of their won seats were given to other parties. The mayorship of Karachi was also stolen, said Hafiz Naeemur Rehman. He added that Syed Ali Geelani endured imprisonment and hardships for the freedom of Kashmir and spent his entire life fighting Pakistan's cause, yet our rulers never gave him the recognition he truly deserved. He stated that our ruling elite is afraid that if the real heroes are brought to light, there will be no place left for the fake ones. He further said that Emir Jamaat-e-Islami in Indian-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, Dr. Abdul Hameed Fayaz, Asiya Andrabi, her ailing husband Qasim Faktoo, Yasin Malik, the ailing Shabir Shah, and hundreds of other leaders of the freedom movement have been imprisoned in Indian jails for years. Yet, the government of Pakistan is not raising their plight on any forum, which is not only regrettable but also condemnable, he concluded. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
10 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Zardari names Dogar IHC's senior-most judge
Listen to article President Asif Ali Zardari has officially declared Justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar as the senior-most judge of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and confirmed the permanent transfer of Justice Dogar along with two other judges. Following the president's decision, a new seniority list of IHC judges was released through a gazette notification dated June 27, 2025. According to the notification, Justice Sarfraz Dogar, who had earlier been serving on transfer, has been placed at the top of the seniority list of the IHC. Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani has been listed second and will serve as the senior puisne judge. Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb follows in third position, while Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan have been listed fourth, fifth and sixth, respectively. Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir ranks seventh, followed by Justice Saman Riffat Imtiaz in eighth place. Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro, another transferred judge, is listed ninth, while Justice Azam Khan, Justice Muhammad Asif (transferred from Quetta) and Justice Inam Amin Minhas occupy the tenth, eleventh and twelfth positions respectively. The matter of confirming the permanency of transferred judges and finalising the updated seniority had been sent to the president for approval. It marks a major turn in the ongoing judges transfer case, which has seen increased legal contestation in recent weeks. However, the controversy continues to brew. Just two days before the new list was issued, five IHC judges filed a formal appeal against the Supreme Court's decision, arguing that the transfers undermined the Constitution's clear stipulations on judicial appointments and seniority. On June 27, five judges of the Islamabad High Court had filed an appeal against the Supreme Court's earlier ruling, requesting a stay on the president's implementation of that judgment. They urged the court to bar the president from acting on the decision until the matter could be fully adjudicated. The judges - Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz — had earlier submitted a representation challenging the basis of the transfers. They contended that a judge transferred to another high court must take a fresh oath and that their seniority should be determined from the date of their new appointment, not their original judicial service. According to the petition, this means the transferred judges should rank below the sitting IHC justices who were already part of the court. The dissenting judges had also refrained from attending Justice Dogar's oath-taking ceremony as acting chief justice of the IHC — a symbolic protest that underlined the deepening rift within the bench. The legal community now awaits the July 1 meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), which is expected to take up the matter of permanent appointments of chief justices to the Islamabad, Sindh and Peshawar High Courts. The names of Justice Dogar, Justice Kayani, and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb are currently under consideration for the IHC slot.
