ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial expressed his realization that the use of Article 184/3 of the Constitution has increased, acknowledging the possibility of mistakes arising from its application.
The Chief Justice of Pakistan made these remarks during a review hearing conducted by a three-member bench, headed by him and consisting of Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ijazul Ahsan. The review petitions were filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and the provincial government, seeking a reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s ruling on April 4 regarding the scheduling of elections in Punjab for May 14.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan addressed the bench’s previous remarks made during the Tuesday hearing. The attorney general stated that the court had questioned why the ECP did not raise certain points earlier and referred to the court’s comments regarding the government’s adherence to its stance on the 3-4 majority order.
He emphasized that the government had already mentioned the majority judgment in its response and had argued that elections in one province would impact the polls in the National Assembly.
In response, the chief justice reassured the attorney general that the court was attentive and open to hearing his arguments. He emphasized that if any significant points were raised, the court would carefully review them before making a decision.
Addressing reports that the Supreme Court had provided a Mercedes to PTI Chairman Imran Khan for his appearance on May 11, the chief justice debunked the false claims, asserting that he did not utilize such a vehicle.
SC Adjourns Punjab Polls Case Till Tomorrow
Furthermore, the chief justice urged the attorney general to advise his colleagues against using harsh language in parliament. The proceedings then resumed with ECP lawyer Sajeel Swati presenting his arguments.
Swati emphasized that the Supreme Court has always interpreted the Constitution as a “living document,” asserting that the scope of review should not be limited as the Supreme Court serves as the ultimate forum of justice.
In response, the chief justice highlighted the difference between the scope of review and appeal based on 150 years of judicial precedents, expressing disappointment that the ECP lawyer had not addressed this question during the previous hearing.
Justice Munib Akhtar cautioned that accepting the ECP’s arguments on the jurisdiction of review and appeal would render the rules of the Supreme Court ineffective and potentially reopen cases dating back several years.
The ECP lawyer argued that the time for filing a review should not be limited, leading Justice Akhtar to request a proposed solution since it was the first time in 70 years that this point had been raised. The ECP lawyer contended that the constitutional provision for reviewing rules should not be interrupted.
The chief justice, recognizing the increased use of Article 184/3, expressed the realization that it could lead to mistakes. The hearing was adjourned until Thursday, with the chief justice urging the ECP lawyer to present arguments on the actual case.
On April 4, the Supreme Court ordered the Punjab provincial assembly election to be held on May 14. The court directed the federal government to provide funds and necessary personnel for the elections.
However, the ECP later approached the court seeking a review of this order, leading to the ongoing review proceedings. The apex court will proceed in accordance with the Constitution and remains committed to resolving the issue surrounding the scheduled elections in Punjab.
