After receiving approval from the Standing Committee on Law and Justice of the National Assembly (NA), the bill was eventually passed.
Azam Nazeer Tarar, the law minister, stated during the meeting that the bill aspires to have open processes in the supreme court. “This bill was an old Bar Council demand that suggested that indiscriminate use of 184(3) should end,” he continued.
The right to appeal is part of the bill, Tarar said, adding that the Parliament should pass legislation immediately now.
The law minister stated that three judges did not use the suo motu notice following Iftikhar Chaudhry, whereas former CJP Saqib Nisar did so without any hesitation.
The minister claimed that people have spoken out against the “one-man show” and that recently, a dissenting opinion from the two Supreme Court justices had also surfaced.
There have been requests for Parliament to adopt a law on this, he said. The Bar spoke out in favor of courtroom freedom, and two organizations praised the bill, he continued.
In addition, every case and appeal before the Supreme Court will be heard and resolved by the bench established by the committee, according to Tarar, who said that the committee suggested in the bill would govern the situation.
According to the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader, the committee will be composed of the CJP and two senior judges.
The bill, according to Tarar, is in the public interest, and he noted that the right to choose a new attorney is protected by the constitution. The measure will also make changes to the right to appeal cases that are still unresolved, he said.
According to PML-N leader Mohsin Shahnawaz Ranjha, the judiciary interprets the Constitution, while Parliament is responsible for enacting laws.
Let them do their job, and let us do ours, he continued.
The measure should be introduced at this time, according to Alia Kamran of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal Pakistan (MMAP).
The bill includes transferring the chief justice’s suo motu notice authority to a three-member committee made up of senior judges.
In addition, the law has a provision that grants the opportunity to appeal the judgment; this right may be used within 30 days, after which a hearing date would be set for two weeks.
Any issue, appeal, or matter before the Supreme Court will be heard and decided upon by a bench made up of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and two senior judges, in that order, according to the bill, a copy of which Geo News has obtained.
The bill further stated that the committee’s decision must be made by a majority vote. Yet, the two SC judges contrasted majority rule with “dictatorship” in their thorough comments.
“Making all decisions by majority vote alone is no less dictatorial, and the absolutist attitude to contentious matters is the mark of extremists,” they declared.
The bill also clarified that any matter involving the exercise of original jurisdiction pursuant to clause (3) of Article 184 of the Constitution shall be brought before the committee established under section 2 for examination, and if the committee determines that a matter of public importance involving the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II of the Constitution is involved, it shall establish a bench consisting of not less than three members but also one of the following:
The committee shall choose a bench of at least five judges of the supreme court to hear cases involving constitutional interpretation in the interim.
As part of filing a review application under Article 188 of the Constitution, the law also allows the party to designate the counsel of its choosing. It should be remembered that when we talk about counsel, we’re talking about a Supreme Court advocate.
In a cause, appeal, or other matter, “an application arguing urgency or requesting interim relief shall be fixed for hearing within fourteen days from the date of its filing,” the measure stated.
