The selection of judges for this purpose has been criticized as justifying the regulation of the discretionary powers of the chief justice of Pakistan.
Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, the two senior-most judges, were once again left out of a larger bench hearing politically sensitive cases by CJP Umar Ata Bandial, which infuriated the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), the supreme disciplinary body for lawyers.
The PBC has declared a nationwide complete strike and court proceeding boycott in response to the hearing.
The legislation to limit the CJP’s authority was passed at the request of the bar, according to Hasan Raza Pasha, the chairman of the PBC Executive Committee.
Even Hamid Khan, the head of the Professional Group, has expressed dissatisfaction that only “like-minded” judges were added to a larger bench.
Another PBC member, Amjad Shah, cautioned that the SC would be accountable if the country’s parliamentary system failed, emphasising that this was not a matter of the rule of law but rather a “war for supremacy” in which everything was fair to accomplish the desired goal.
The exclusion of senior judges had raised concerns about the CJP’s “unfettered” powers to constitute benches, according to advocate Mirza Moiz Baig, and he claimed that this would only widen the gap within the top court.
He also emphasised that judges were prohibited from acting in a way that served their own interests under Article IV of the judges’ code of conduct.
Salahuddin Ahmed, a former president of the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA), pointed out that the case was even prematurely listed as “Setting aside the SC Bill 2023,” and Reema Omer, another legal analyst, stated that the CJP must use his discretionary powers under the rules to appoint benches in a fair, open, and organised manner.
The CJP made the strongest case for passing the exact same law that this petition had challenged, according to attorney Salar Khan, because of this bench’s predictability.
It is clear that there has been considerable controversy over the creation of a bench to hear petitions against the bill by excluding senior judges, and issues have been raised regarding the regulation of the CJP’s powers.
The legal community is calling for fairness and transparency in the selection of benches, which shouldn’t be biased in favour of any one group. To protect the independence of the judiciary and uphold the rule of law, the SC must take these worries seriously.
