Reserved seats case: Ruling ‘amended' constitution, says constitutional bench
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned whether the judges should be concerned with what is written in the constitution and the law or the extraneous factors? He noted that constitution was re-written and there is history because it was done in the case of Article 63A of the constitution too. He said when the law is clear then there is no need of 'read in' or 'read down', and the Court has to adhere to the provisions.
An 11-member Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC), headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, on Thursday, heard the review petitions of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples' Party (PPP) and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
Reserved seats case: SIC lawyer proposes three sets of relief
The proceeding was live-streamed on SC's YouTube channel.
Justice Musarrat Hilali said that they majority [judgment] has discussed 13th January 2025 judgment, which review has been pending. Justice Ali Baqar Najafi said they (the majority) have expressed their mind, while alluding to the fact of the case. He asked what the oath of a judge says, and what is expected of him to deliver judgment on the basis of principles or law?
Faisal Siddiqui, representing SIC, argued that 11 judges, including Justice (retired) Qazi Faez, Justice Mandokhail and Justice Yahya Afridi, in their verdicts maintained that all the independent candidates are Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) members and the PTI is entitled to 78 reserved seats of women and non-Muslims in the National and the provincial assemblies.
He requested the bench to dismiss the reviews petition, in which, additional grounds have not been filed. However, Justice Amin told him that the review petitions have been filed only against the majority judgment, while the judgments of other judges are intact.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said: 'We (Justice Jamal and ex-CJP Qazi Faez) have maintained that only those independent candidates who in their nomination papers mentioned PTI and attached the party are the PTI members in the parliament.' He questioned how they can compel anyone who has contested election as an independent to join a particular party, or force anyone not to contest election as an independent.
Faisal argued that all the 13 judges held that the PTI-backed independent candidates cannot join the SIC, and also reserved seats cannot be given to it. However, they maintained that the PTI was entitled to the reserved seats, adding the disagreement was on the number of PTI-affiliated candidates. The judges also disagreed with the majority judgment on timeline and the process described for joining the PTI by the independents, the SIC counsel submitted. He said that Justice Yahya had left this issue to be decided by the ECP.
Justice Amin said whether any of the party during the original proceedings discussed that the reserved seats should be given to the PTI. Justice Mandokhail questioned whether only one and not all the political parties deserve fair treatment?
Justice Musarrat Hilali questioned that Hamid Raza who had established the SIC in 2013 and has been its chairman then why he contested general elections as an independent instead of on the SIC platform, and after winning the election joined the SIC, and PTI-backed independent candidates were asked to join the SIC.
She said if a party does not have presence in the parliament then how the independent candidates can join it. She asked what the PTI-backed independents have mentioned in their forms when they were joining the SIC.
Faisal argued that the PTI's Intra-Party Election (IPE) was not accepted by the ECP, Peshawar High Court (PHC) and the Supreme Court and it was deprived of election symbol. He said that the 11 judges in their judgments stated that the ECP has in fact misunderstood and wrongly applied the Supreme Court judgment that the PTI is out of February 2024 elections.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
7 hours ago
- Business Recorder
India in disarray
India was never in its history a unified entity. Even its name India was coined after the Sindhu aka Indus River, who the Greeks referred to as 'Indos'. India's original name was Bharat, even today many Indians more out of bigotry, prejudice and bias refer to their country as 'Bharat'; the word is a derivative from the name of the ancient tribe that inhabited some areas of India, called 'Bharata'. The Persians had named their Eastern neighbour as 'Hindustan'. Later, the Britishers recognising that Hindustan had an implicit meaning, as the land of Hindus, decided to do away with this narrow association to a single religion that had peacefully coexisted with so many other religions; Islam being the predominant of them. Hindustan became India for Britain. Till about the beginning of the 19th century, most of India was divided into individual principalities and distinctly different empires. From Maharajas to Nizams. The 1757 Battle of Plassey changed the course of the history of India. Through the betrayal by one traitor, Sirajuddula lost to Robert Clive. Most fiefdoms thereafter without any military engagement surrendered to become part of the Indian Union. Until the arrival of the British to the court of Emperor Jehangir, the 'spice merchants' of King James I, led by Sir Thomas Roe, who sought to promote trade with India, the region then was largely diverse with numerous kingdoms and empires. No ruler, inclusive of the Mauriyas, Guptas or the Mughal emperors were able to consolidate the region into a single nation in modern sense of our understanding today of what nation state means. So in reality, the concept of Akhand Bharat has been an illusionary absurdity. A deception of the narrow-minded. The divide between northern India and southern India is stark and naked. They have no common culture, nor traditions or even eating preferences. The dissimilarity is more pronounced than similarity. Recently, Narendra Modi alongside his cohorts has been planning to impose Hindi as a popular language of the common man in states like Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, where in reality Hindi is hardly spoken or understood — even its Urdu version of 'Hindustani' is not popular with the people in the South. The mantle show-piece Muslim presidents of India, starting from Dr Zakir Hussain to Dr Abdul Kalam served as 'eye sores' for the militant Hindu dominant RSS, the forerunner of BJP. Stalwarts in their own right but were positioned to offices that were ceremonial, without teeth or bite. More as an advertisement to Indian claims of secularism. Modi has destroyed that fabric. Secularism has been crushed. India is today a fanatical state. Modi is a communalist, a bigot and a die-hard hater of Muslims. Something that our Arab brothers and friends do not realise while opening their coffers to dole out dollars, or when they are head over heels while welcoming the 'Butcher of Gujarat', who initially only preyed upon Muslims, but has now gone beyond to slaughter Christians, Sikhs and Jains. Indians must stop this genocidal Hindu terrorist. He brings to the largely tolerant and peace loving Indians/Hindus a bad name. The country that prided itself as a secular state is now a hostage to Modi's fanatical Hinduism. The creation of Bangladesh neither destroyed the two-nation theory nor did it give any meaning to the concept of 'Akhand Bharat'. Bangladesh is an independent country and continues to be one; the 15-year hiatus as a satellite state of India is now done and dusted. In a judicious historical analysis, it is not India that helped creation of Bangladesh — nay, it was the folly of Islamabad that led to East Pakistan's breaking away — the blame is on us; the credit cannot be India's. In the 'seven sister states' in the North East of India, there is an active and simmering volcano of discontentment that will most likely blow up, leading up to declaration of independence from the forced Union with India. These states have nothing in common with India. Their languages, cultures and cuisines are different, with no semblance of to any part of India. India is fragmented. All illusions of unity within diversity is a result of flawed thinking that is at best beset with delusional tendencies. The Marathas can't break bread with the West Bengalis. Their food, customs, traditions, etc., are different. They cannot converse with each other, except if they know English. Even Bollywood is no exception to this diverseness and divisions either. The Assamese/Bengali music directors like, SD Burman, RD Burman, Salil Chaudhry, etc. preferred Bengali singers — Kishore Kumar being the prominent followed by Great Dutt; OP Nayyar from Punjab preferred Mohammed Rafi and Shamshad Begum, both from Amritsar/Lahore. Today a handful of Indians subscribe to Akhand Bharat as a concept — it is and shall remain a pipe dream. The diversity is not a unifying factor but is more diverse. The burden of forced Union is already under strain. Since 1947, India despite being the larger country hasn't been able to maintain good neighbourly relations with the countries in the region. The Indian quest for dominance and hegemony over the entire South Asia is the hallmark and cornerstone of its foreign and interior policy. India has problems with Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, the Maldives, People's Republic of China and Pakistan. Bhutan and Sikkim, it swallowed without a burp. With Pakistan it has already fought five wars and countless skirmishes at the border. The country truly is a war monger. It has been more acute since Modi was saddled in New Delhi; having done RSS/BJP proud by massive genocidal killing of Muslims in Gujarat, he was rewarded with the premiership. India gains appreciation for its status as the largest democracy in the world. That's a farce. It is untrue. Under the guise of democracy the various rights and privileges available to the electorate are stripped. The people are pulverised and stunned. Indian democracy is a sham. To cite only one case, the Kashmir issue still burns alive. The people stand disenfranchised. The Indian Constitution was mutilated on August 5th 2019 by the revocation of Article 370, depriving Kashmir of its special status. So much about freedom and democracy. Donald Trump has mentioned again in confirmation to the reality that six Indian planes were brought down from the skies in just a few minutes. Modi is furious. Rahul Gandhi has rightfully demanded a wily Modi come clean and admit or dare to refute. Indian leadership is suffering from an illusion of grandeur of invincibility. Pakistan recently punctured this hot air balloon. As a deeply wounded fox or wolf (cannot use Lion because that will raise his stature in the animal kingdom and the kingdom may feel repulsed, revolted and insulted by this comparison) Modi is licking his wounds from the misfired misadventure at Pahalgam. He is biding his time. Pakistan beware. India is in disarray. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
8 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Delivery of timely, effective justice a moral imperative: CJP
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi underscored that the delivery of timely and effective justice is not only a constitutional obligation but also a moral imperative. CJP Yahya was chairing the fifth interactive session on Tuesday at the Supreme Court building. The chief justice was apprised of substantial headway on the court's ambitious reform agenda. Out of 89 identified initiatives, 26 have been successfully completed, reflecting concrete advancements in key areas. Another 44 are under way, while 14 are scheduled to begin shortly. These milestones underscore the judiciary's steadfast commitment to modernising its operations and improving efficiency in justice delivery. The chief justice was further informed of a notable reduction in case pendency as a direct result of these initiatives, marking a significant step towards timely resolution of cases. While reviewing performance in critical areas such as case categorisation, document scanning, and the Case Management System, he expressed concern over delays—particularly in the categorisation of cases—and directed all concerned departments to expedite completion of these tasks before the next review meeting. Such progress, he emphasised, is essential for sustaining public confidence and ensuring that reforms remain aligned with the needs and expectations of litigants. The session concluded with the chief justice commending the valuable contributions of judicial officers, technical experts, and policy advisors. He reiterated the Supreme Court's dedication to fostering innovation, inclusivity, and collaboration in building a justice system that is modern, transparent, and equitable. The session convened senior officials, stakeholders, and officers of the Supreme Court to evaluate the progress of comprehensive judicial reforms aimed at enhancing service delivery and expanding access to justice nationwide. The meeting was attended by the Registrar Supreme Court Muhammad Salim Khan; development expert Sher Shah (joining online from France); IT expert Hamayun Zafar; section heads from the Supreme Court's Principal Seat and Branch Registries; Senior Director of the Federal Judicial Academy; and a representative of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan (LJCP). Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
8 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Punjab opposition leader, 32 PTI workers sentenced to 10 years
SARGODHA: An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Sargodha has sentenced Punjab Assembly Opposition leader Ahmed Khan Bhachar and 32 other Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) workers to 10 years of imprisonment each in the May 9 riots case. As per details, the verdict was announced by Anti-Terrorism Court Judge Muhammad Naeem Sheikh. Among those convicted are Punjab Assembly Opposition Leader Malik Ahmed Khan Bhachar, MNA Rana Bilal, and MNA Ahmed Chattha. The verdict was issued after the court heard nine separate cases related to the incident. The case, registered at the Musa Khel police station, pertained to the violent protests and vandalism that erupted in Mianwali following the arrest of PTI founder Imran Khan in a graft case. The ATC found Ahmed Khan Bachar and the other accused guilty of participating in the unrest, which targeted state institutions and public property. Violent clashes were broken out across Pakistan after former prime minister Imran Khan was arrested on May 9, 2023. The protests were held in remote and major cities as the party workers were agitated due to their chairman's arrest, with Balochistan, Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Islamabad summoning the armed forces to ensure law and order. Army installations, including Corps Commander's house in Lahore, had come under attack during the protests by PTI workers. It is pertinent to mention that the PTI founder is named as main accused in all the May 9 riots cases. The verdict came at the time when the opposition MPAs allegedly caused disruption and damaged property during a Punjab Assembly session on June 27, 2025. In response, Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan suspended the membership of these 26 SIC lawmakers. Later on June 28, the speaker announced his decision to refer the matter to the ECP for the disqualification of the suspended members. The court had granted exemption from personal appearance to all 32 accused, including Malik Ahmed Khan Bhachar. PTI lawyers and supporters have rejected the court's ruling, calling it unfair and politically motivated. The members suspended by the speaker included Malik Fahad Masood, Muhammad Tanvir Aslam, Syed Riffat Mehmood, Yasir Mehmood Qureshi, Kalimullah Khan, Muhammad Ansar Iqbal, Ali Asif, Zulfiqar Ali, Ahmed Mujtaba Chaudhry, Shahid Javed, Muhammad Ismail, Khayal Ahmed, Shehbaz Ahmed, Tayyab Rashid, Imtiaz Mehmood, Ali Imtiaz, Rashid Tufail, Murtaza Iqbal, Khalid Zubair, Ijaz Shafi, Saima Kanwal, Muhammad Naeem, Sajjad Ahmed, Rana Aurangzeb, Shoaib Mir and Usama Asghar Ali Gujjar. Meanwhile, talking to a private television channel, Bhachar strongly criticized the ATC decision and announced plans to challenge the verdict in the Lahore High Court. 'The court has ruled against me in a politically driven case that completely deviates from the Constitution,' said Bhachar. 'This decision was pronounced without following due legal process. Once I receive the written verdict, I will immediately approach the High Court.'
