Refusal to form full court draws flak for CJP
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi is facing criticism after the minutes of a three-member Supreme Court Committee revealed that he ignored a majority decision last year to form a full court to hear petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
The SC committee, operating under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023 to form regular benches, was chaired by CJP Afridi in late October last year, with Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar as members.
The majority — Justices Shah and Akhtar — had ordered the petitions be listed for hearing before a full court on November 4, 2024. According to the minutes, CJP Afridi argued that the committee lacked legal authority to direct the formation of a full court. He also consulted all judges individually and nine of the 13 supported the formation of a constitutional bench to hear the case.
Now that the CJP's justification for the non-formation of a full court is in public domain, lawyers are questioning his conduct by asking who will determine how many judges had opposed and what question was placed before each judge.
"How could judges have been consulted on a matter which, according to the statute, was not within their jurisdiction? Why every week all 23 judges are not consulted?" asked a senior lawyer, while speaking to The Express Tribune on the condition of anonymity.
Advocate Abdul Moiz Jaferii said he failed to understand why an informal poll of other judges was taken by the CJP after the practice and procedure committeeas it then wasmade a majority decision.
"I similarly fail to understand why such a determination, if it was needed after the committee decision, was not taken in a formal full court meeting.
''I also fail to understand why the CJP was willing to interpret the 26th Amendment in favour of the executive's influence, and reluctant to have the amendment's constitutionality first tested by a full sitting of his peers," Jaferii added.
Advocate Asad Rahim Khan said the job of the chief justice, before everything else, is to preserve the independence of the judiciarynot to accept its subordination by the executive.
"Should [former] chief justice Nasirul Mulk have put off a full court from hearing the challenge to the 21st Amendment, by arguing that Article 175(3) had already been amended, and there was nothing left for the court to do about it? For or against, the judges decide according to their consciences, and the law is settled. Again, that is their job," said the advocate.
He said the greatest judicial regression in 30 years — where the amendment's very passage is under a cloud — can't be treated as a fait accompli.
"Going by this logic, if the Constitution were subverted through a [provisional constitutional order] PCO or some other unlawful means tomorrow, that wouldn't be heard either, as it would be [illegally] protected in the text of the Constitution," he added.
"The longer the amendment is undecided, the longer its automatic acceptance, and, as a result, the longer the judiciary's corrosion."
Former additional attorney general Waqar Rana said it would have been just, fair and proper that 26th Amendment cases were listed for hearing prior to the meeting of the newly formed Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) which appointed a constitutional bench.
The Amendment came on October 21, 2024 and former CJP Qazi Faez Isa retired on October 26, 2024.
Rana said the CJP Afridi was appointed under the new constitutional dispensation. Thus any challenge to the 26 Amendment on any ground is now virtually impossible.
"On the other hand when the 95th Amendment was challenged in India, the Indian Supreme Court did not hold the meeting of the country's judicial commission prior to the case fixation and the Indian SC, later, struck down that amendment," he added.
Another senior lawyer opined that paragraph 3 of the CJP's response was bizarre.
"It indicates that the SC does not believe in transparency and fears criticism. Public comment is the best form of accountability. Avoiding a full court meeting at that time shows the intent.
"The matter should have been discussed in a full court meeting because the opinion of the majority of members of committee was binding. The law was violated by the CJP," he said.
He asked how one member could violate the decision of a statutory committee empowered to decide how and which cases were to be fixed. "The statute did not give power to one member to overrule the majority decision. The other judges were not relevant and seeking their informal individual opinion was illegal and in outright violation of law," he added.
Since November last year, the constitutional bench has been unable to decide the fate of the 26th Constitutional Amendment. In January, the constitutional bench took up the matter and adjourned the hearing for three weeks. Later, the bench did not hear the case.
Interestingly, the creation of the constitutional bench itself is under challenge. Questions are being raised as to how the beneficiaries of 26th Constitutional Amendment can decide about their future.
Now the situation has changed in the apex court. Eight new judges have been elevated to the apex court since February. Even most of them are included in the constitutional benches.
Last November, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar urged the CJP to immediately fix hearings for the pleas challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
In their letter, the two judges, who are part of the committee responsible for fixing cases and forming benches under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act (2023), stated that the committee has decided to hear these constitutional petitions in a full court, with the initial hearing date set for Nov 4.
The dispute began on October 31, when Justices Shah and Akhtar formally addressed a letter to CJP Afridi, urging him to hold a meeting under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act, 2023.
With no response from the CJP, Justices Shah and Akhtar held an independent meeting in the latter's chambers to determine the next steps. Following this private session, the two justices decided by majority vote to bring the amendment petitions before a full court on November 4.
They then sent a second letter to CJP Afridi, expressing their concerns over the postponement. According to the letter, the judges had previously informed the registrar of their decision on October 31 and instructed the registrar to publish the decision on the Supreme Court's official website.
They argued that the petitions challenging the amendment demand a comprehensive review by the full court, as this matter involves constitutional implications that go beyond standard judicial concerns.
By refraining from convening a full court, the chief justice had, according to some experts, signaled a cautious approach to the handling of such cases, potentially seeking to avoid judicial overreach or political entanglements.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
13 hours ago
- Business Recorder
14th August Independence Day: Journey of unprecedented sufferings
Pakistanis have endured 78 years of a painful journey comprised of unprecedented politico and socio-economic sufferings. The sufferings of Pakistanis, especially the poor and less privileged, will continue unabated no matter how many Independence Days we celebrate, unless the society is restructured on the principles of equity, fairness and justice—fundamental elements enunciated in Article 3 of the 1973 Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan ['the Constitution']. The way landmark majority judgement of 9-memebre of Supreme Court of Pakistan for rectifying the mistake of Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in allocating reserve seats through enacting Elections (Second Amendment) Act, 2024 by the Senate & National Assembly—just a week before the 77th Independence Day—reversed in a review judgement is highly lamentable. It violated well-established jurisprudence of Article 188 of the Constitution, pushing the country towards further anarchy and constitutional breakdown. Such a mockery of justice and constitutionalism is highly deplorable, when the nation is already weary of unabated terrorism, lawlessness, economic meltdown, unprecedented tax burden and high food inflation. The regime's illegitimacy giving rise to unbated political instability and perpetual economic subjugation to International Monetary Fund (IMF) and others are not sudden isolated phenomena. These are because of State captivity in the hands of militro-judicial-civil complex, absentee landowners, pirs (spiritual leaders), industrialist-turned politicians and unscrupulous traders. Pakistan's economy serves these privileged classes. The militro-judicial-civil complex not only enjoys unprecedented tax-free benefits at the cost of taxpayers' money but has failed to deliver for what it is paid. Absentee landowners and industrialists continuously amass wealth by exploiting landless tillers and industrial workers, respectively. Greedy hoarders and dishonest traders create artificial hikes in prices of essential items and thrive on hard-earned incomes of the poor and fixed-income classes without even sparing the hapless citizens during auspicious occasions like Eid when prices go beyond the reach of even well-to-do middle-class families. Adding insult to injury, successive governments keep on imposing and increasing oppressive, unbearable indirect taxes on the poor, while extending unprecedented benefits to the rich and mighty. This has always been the real dilemma of Pakistan, where we are celebrating 78th Independence Day on August 14, 2025! The anti-people alliance of militro-judicial-civil complex is the root cause of our major ills. Through cross marriages, they 'look after' each other and manage to perpetuate control over State institutions and economic resources. For civil bureaucrats, life revolves around good postings, promotions, lucrative benefits, foreign tours and nationalities! Officers having a political clout are requisitioned by federal and provincial ministries for lucrative posts with unbelievable perks and benefits. The so-called civil servants (behaving like brown sahibs believing to be even more privileged than gora rulers) serve their political masters' interests rather than the people, sometimes in defiance of established rules and regulations, destroying the entire structure of civil services, where 'political connections' is now the name of the game. Polarisation, favouratism and politicisation within State institutions are showing their disastrous results. While law and order has always been a grave concern, terrorists now freely attack law enforcement personnel and even the members of armed forces with impunity. Despite taking enormous taxes, people are forced to arrange their own security while the government machinery serves the rulers alone. Even after taking oath for the second time, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has not learnt any lessons from his past mistakes as he continues to act like the 'servant' of those who matter in the land, and keeps on promoting nepotism and cronyism. Once again, under his previous and present rule, many high-clibre officers are denied postings/promotions they deserve on merit or placed in surplus pool on flimsy grounds, while 'loyalists', though junior and incompetent, are enjoying lucrative posts and benefits. There seems no end to such brazen acts on the part of elites that keep on humming the mantra of democracy, but act in an authoritarian and irresponsible manner. Militro-judicial-civil complex and their cronies will never make Pakistan an egalitarian State—as demonstrated repeatedly by them. The latest evidence is the Finance Act, 2025 not imposing a single tax on the rich and mighty to bridge the huge fiscal deficit. On the contrary, indirect taxes have been raised, even under the garb of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, to further crush the poor and overburden the fast-squeezing middle-class. The same pro-rich approach was adopted in federal budget for FY 2024-25, which not also imposed unbearable tax burden of the lower and middle class salaried persons. Mindless borrowings simultaneously from banks and foreign lenders continue to push the nation in darker abyss of 'debt prison'—debt servicing alone is now the largest burden on the economy absorbing all taxes collected by Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), after 57.5% share to provinces, and even non-tax revenue—all happening due to ruthless spending to fund luxuries of the State Oligarchy. The fiscal deficit, projected in Budget 2025-26 is Rs. 6.5 trillion whereas debt servicing at Rs. 8.2 trillion! In fiscal year (FY) 2025, deficit was Rs. 7.4 trillion and debt servicing was Rs. 8.9 trillion. In FY 2024, budget was prepared under the guidance of MuhmmadIshaq Dar, with debt servicing allocation of Rs. 7.3 trillion that ultimately overran to Rs. 8.16 trillion! The jubilation and merriment over staff-level agreement with IMF on July 12, 2024 for 37-month Extended Fund Facility (EFF) programme of US$7 billion speaks volume of moral bankruptcy of our ruling elites. What a pity that that they celebrate further indebtedness! Just three days before the 84th Pakistan Day, March 23, 2024, Press release of IMF confirming successful completion of SBA was treated as an advance gift of Pakistan Resolution to the nation—height of shameless behaviour! The elites are, however, still happy as they enjoy unprecedented benefits and perquisites, free plots, foreign trips, foreign nationalities, free club facilities, just to mention a few, all funded by the poor taxpayers. On the other hand, there is no political will to provide free health and education to the ordinary people, what to speak of fulfilling other obligations mentioned in the Constitution. Dr. Ishrat Husain, in his book, Pakistan: The Economy of an Elitist State, has aptly observed that in sharp contrast to the East Asian model of 'shared growth', based on rapid economic development, coupled with a rapid reduction in poverty and more equitable distribution of the benefits of development, in Pakistan, the elitist model confers political and economic powers to a small coterie of elite (parasites). While quoting Dr. Ishrat's work, Dr. Khalil Ahmad, in his book, Pakistan Mein RiastiAshrafiyaKaA'roj (Rise of State Oligarchy in Pakistan), has also concluded: 'Pakistan is presently owned and exploited by elites whereas it should belong to the people of Pakistan'. Powerful State officials, in hand with the rich and mighty men in khaki and corrupt politicians, exploit the system for self-aggrandisement. For example, FBR through SROs [Statutory Regulator Orders] at the behest of political masters provides 'legal' ways and means to society's powerful sections to amass huge wealth—exemptions and concessions given to them by acts of Parliament are worth billions of rupees. It is worth mentioning that under Ishaq Dar during 2013-17, FBR issued many favourable notifications, especially for sugar and steel industry. In 2012 when officers of Grade 19-22 were allowed compulsory monetized transport allowance, SRO 569(I)/2012 was issued on 26 May 2012 [still operative] providing that government officials in Grade 20-22 would pay just 5% tax on this allowance. The powerful bureaucrats use official cars, get monetized allowance, and pay meagre tax. On the contrary, their counterparts in private sector pay tax on this perquisite at the normal rate! This injustice was highlighted in an earlier column. It was hoped that with the new Chairman of FBR, Rashid MahmoodLangrial, personal choice and confidant of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, this benefit would be withdrawn. However, he himself continued to enjoy it! It is worth mentioning that in Finance Act 2013, the flying allowance of airline pilots was clubbed with salary, but Ishaq Dar did not extend similar treatment to mighty bureaucrats for their transport allowance showing how elites protect each other and professionals like pilots get raw deals just because they are not part of State Oligarchy. The problem of Pakistan is not scarcity of resources, but unwillingness in tapping and/or properly utilizing and managing their equitable distribution, absence of effective administrative and justice systems to check socio-economic injustice. It has been repeatedly highlighted by different writers that without imposing any new tax or raising the rates of the existing ones, the total revenue collection at federal level alone can be Rs 30 trillion (Rs. 18 trillion direct taxes and Rs. 12 trillion indirect taxes) if existing tax gap is bridged and informal economy is brought into tax net. This level of collection is possible but as a first step, we will have to reform our administrative machinery and judiciary. Expensive State property occupied by State elites (judges and high-ranking civil-military bureaucrats) as 'residences' must be utilized commercially through long-term lease. Their benefits and perquisites should be monetized. Consolidated Pay Package for them, fair and adequate, would reduce corruption, remove a strong sense of elitism and improve governance. For politicians and all State functionaries, an independent and effective accountability apparatus is necessary. Without fundamental structural reforms, we cannot establish a true democratic polity extend socio-economic justice for all, ensure rapid growth with job opportunities for millions of young people, whose frustration is on the rise with every passing day as elites are showing apathy towards them while enjoying luxuries at the State's expense. Brutal and naked exploitation of the have-nots in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and dehumanization of society are leading to gruesome incidents where people are committing suicides or killing innocents without any remorse and repentance. We will have to move fast to reverse this trend and make Pakistan a true democratic republic for the people, not jagir [fiefdom] of elites. Time has come to make a firm resolve on 78th Independence Day and take definitive actions to implement in letter and spirit Article 3 of the Constitution which says: 'The State shall ensure the elimination of all forms of exploitation and the gradual fulfillment of the fundamental principle, from each according to his ability to each according to his work'. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Justice system's credibility rests in fairness of decisions and timeliness: SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court declared that a justice system's credibility rests not only in the fairness of its decisions but also in the timeliness with which those decisions are rendered. A two-judge bench comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ayesha A Malik stated the courts must evolve into engines of timely, transparent, and citizen-focused justice. This relates to auction of an immovable property carried out by a bank in execution of a money decree dated 26.04.2010. The auction took place in 2011. The petitioner promptly raised objections the same year, which were dismissed. He then filed an appeal before the Peshawar High Court (PHC), which remained pending for 10 years, and ultimately decision was delivered in 2021. The case then reached the Supreme Court in 2022 and was taken up in 2025. The glaring aspect of the case is that after 14 years since the auction and due notice, neither the petitioner nor any authorised representative appeared before the apex court to pursue the petition. The bench, however, dismissed the petition on merits as well as for non-prosecution, and directed the SC office to dispatch a copy of this order to the parties for information and record. The judgment noted that in this case the appeal of the petitioner kept pending before the High Court for 10 years. 'It is beyond cavil that delay in adjudicating cases by the courts at any tier of the justice system corrodes public confidence in the judiciary, undermines the rule of law, and disproportionately harms the weak and vulnerable who cannot afford the cost of prolonged litigation. Delay in adjudication carries severe macroeconomic and societal consequences: it deters investment, renders contracts illusory, and weakens the institutional legitimacy of the judiciary.' The judgment said that the issue of delay is not merely administrative, it is constitutional. The right to access to justice is guaranteed by Articles 4, 9 and 10A of 1973 Constitution. It encompasses within it the right to a fair and timely trial. Delay that renders a remedy ineffective; or a right illusory amount to a denial of due process. Justice, to be real, must be both just and timely. The judgment highlighted that over 2.2 million cases are currently pending before courts across Pakistan, including approximately 55,941 cases before this Court alone, in spite of enhancing the number of judges at the Court. These figures are not abstract; they represent disputes suspended in time. Delay in adjudication is not merely a by-product of docket congestion or branch-level inefficiencies; it is a deeper, structural challenge of judicial governance. The court, as a matter of institutional policy and constitutional responsibility, must urgently transition toward a modern, responsive, and intelligent case management framework. Such a system must, at a minimum, ensure: the early fixation of cases on a non-discriminatory basis; the elimination of 'queue-jumping' and preferential scheduling; the prioritisation of matters involving constitutional, economic, or national importance without compromising the timely resolution of individual claims; the implementation of age-tracking protocols to automatically identify dormant cases; and the judicious use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to assist in scheduling and triage while preserving the sanctity of judicial discretion. Judicial systems across the world have recognised that delay is not an intractable inevitability but a solvable institutional challenge. Countries such as Singapore, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Estonia, Canada, China, Denmark, and Australia have undertaken comprehensive reforms combining technology, structural innovation, and procedural discipline to reduce backlog and enhance judicial efficiency. Through tools such as e-filing, real-time dashboards, automated scheduling, and transparent digital oversight, these jurisdictions have moved from being passive custodians of dockets to active managers of justice delivery. The judgment said these international experiences underscore a basic truth: delays in justice are not inevitable; they are a product of institutional design, and can be remedied with vision, planning, and resolve. The judiciary of Pakistan must draw upon these global lessons and commit to transformative reform that integrates technological innovation, administrative restructuring, and disciplined case management. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
15 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Opposition 'bias claim' in civil awards sparks Senate uproar
The upper house of the parliament witnessed uproar on Friday as opposition lawmakers accused the government of politicising this year's civil awards by allegedly favouring ministers and treasury benches, while ignoring deserving figures. The Senate session, chaired by Chairman Yousaf Raza Gillani, turned heated after he announced that several cabinet members and senators had been conferred national honours on August 14. Opposition members demanded disclosure of the criteria used for selection. Among the awardees were Ishaq Dar, Mohsin Naqvi, Musadik Malik, Azam Nazeer Tarar, Faisal Sabzwari, Senator Sherry Rehman, Senator Bushra Anjum, Ahsan Iqbal and Ahad Cheema. Irfan Siddiqui and Sarmad Ali are to receive their awards on March 23 next year. Senator Falak Naz Chitrali questioned, "What war did Atta Tarar fight?" while Senator Humayun Mohmand sarcastically remarked that "the designer of the war, Nawaz Sharif, has not been awarded." PTI's Senator Faisal Javed said party social media activists had countered Indian propaganda "day and night" but were ignored, accusing the government of "destroying the sanctity" of the honours. Defending the awards, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said martyrs and heroes of the Marka-e-Haq had been recognised, including those who lost their homes. He said some senators had "fought on diplomatic fronts abroad" and thanked PTI's social media workers for their online role in the campaign. The atmosphere grew tense when Senator Faisal Javed raised the omission of Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah's picture from official Independence Day advertisements, displaying the founder's picture on the Senate floor. "Explain, or we will not let this House run," he warned. Tarar expressed ignorance of the matter, called the omission "hurtful" and promised an inquiry. The House later unanimously adopted a resolution lauding the founding fathers, the framers of the Constitution and the armed forces. Earlier, Senator Zeeshan Khanzada criticised that while prisoners often receive sentence remissions on August 14, PTI leaders were instead handed "10-year jail terms like Bata sale rates." Separately, Senator Kamran Murtaza voiced concern over the suspension of mobile internet across 36 districts of Balochistan and alleged closure of rail, road and air links, warning of damage to Pakistan's image. Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Dr Tariq Fazal Chaudhry clarified that only mobile internet services had been suspended from August 6 to 31 due to "credible security threats" under the Pakistan Telecommunication (Reorganisation) Act, 1996. He said telephone lines, airline operations, and road and rail links remained functional. "These measures are taken in specific areas facing threats, not across unrelated regions," he said, citing past terror attacks in the province, including on the Jaffar Express and the Army Public School in Khuzdar. On concerns over prepaid internet packages, Dr Chaudhry pledged to take up the matter with the concerned ministry, assuring that unused credit during the suspension period would be carried forward to the next month. The session was adjourned till Monday evening.
