ISLAMABAD: A five-member Supreme Court bench seized with a PTI plea — challenging the Election Commission of Pakistan’s verdict deferring elections in Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa — was dissolved after Justice Aminuddin Khan recused himself from hearing the case.
As the five-member SC bench resumed hearing on the PTI’s plea, Justice Amin said that after a decision issued by a three-member bench headed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa — recommending deferring all suo moto cases under Article 184-3 until the rules are framed — he could not remain in the bench and hear the case.
After Justice Aminuddin recused himself from hearing the case, all members of the larger bench packed and left the podium. Some media channels reported that a new bench would be formed to hear the PTI plea.
The bench comprised Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Aminuddin and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail.
On Wednesday, a three-member Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Aminuddin and Justice Shahid Waheed issued a 2-1 verdict, ordering to put on hold all suo moto cases till rules were framed under Article 184-3.
According to the judgment, “the chief justice of Pakistan does not have the authority to form a special bench, nor does the chief justice have any authority to form a special bench under the Supreme Court rules.” The verdict also said that one judge from different benches was included in the special, and in one instance, a case was fixed for hearing at the end of the court timing.
The bench said in its verdict that the people of Pakistan hold the MPs accountable at the time of election and the MPs were accountable to the people. The verdict further said that the bureaucracy is accountable to the government under the law, but the judiciary is (under the current rules) not answerable to anyone.
The verdict held that the chief justice did not have the power to exclude a judge from a bench after constituting it. A judge can be accountable to the Supreme Judicial Council but not to the judiciary.
According to the verdict, the chief justice cannot thrust his wisdom upon the “constitution because the constitution does not give unilateral and unbridled power the chief justice.”
In his dissenting note, Justice Shahid Waheed wrote that the matters on which the verdict is given were not in front of them.
A five-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial is currently hearing a suo moto case pertaining to Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa elections.
The judgment, authored by Justice Qazi Faez Isa, said there were no rules for hearing suo moto cases and setting up benches. Until rules are framed, hearing on important constitutional and suo moto cases should be deferred, the verdict said.
