ISLAMABAD, Oct 02 (APP):The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned hearing of
the review petition pertaining to
the interpretation of Article 63A till Thursday.
The court granted time to
the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) counsel to have consultation with
the PTI founder in jail and also instructed
the Attorney General for Pakistan to make arrangements in that regard.
A five-member larger bench presided by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Amin ud Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel and Justice Naeem Akhtar Aghan heard
the review petition.
At
the outset,
the Registrar Office presented its report regarding
the issuance of
the detailed judgment in
the case.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Shehzad Shaukat sai
d that the detailed judgment was issued on October 14, 2022, and
the review petition was filed with delay due to waiting of
the order.
The delay could be ignored in a review petition pertaining to
the matter of public interest, he added.
PTI’s Barrister Ali Zafar sai
d that the PTI founder was
the petitioner and he wanted to meet him in jail for consultation before giving arguments.
The chief justice observe
d that the lawyer should have told
the court in that regard during yesterday’s hearing so that it could have issued an order
the same day.
The CJP, addressing Barrister Ali Zafar, observe
d that how he could say that his (CJP’s) act was for certain reason. “How can you talk about my mind? I will not allow any judge or you to talk about my mind.”
He further remarke
d that the lawyer talked about assumptions, while his acts were very transparent.
“If a law comes in
the full court meeting and everyone says it is a bad law. Will
the law be abolished?” he questioned.
Chief Justice Isa rejected Ali Zafar’s objection on
the formation of
the bench, saying that he (the lawyer) had state
d that the decision should be pronounced, “so we pronounced it. We all have a unanimous decision to reject
the objection.”
Justice Mandokhail asked
the lawyer to read
the minutes of Judges Committee to view how many members were there.
The CJP sai
d that there were simple constitutional questions. Whether many constitutional clauses including no-confidence move had become inactive because of
the decision regarding
the Article 63A, he asked.
Lawyer Ali Zafar sai
d that the current bench could not hear
the case without
the judge who had written
the decision. The said judge was not there to defend
the decision.
He sai
d that after rejection of
the objections, he wanted to take instructions from his client whether to give further arguments or not.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) lawyer Farooq H Naek sai
d that it was not a decision on Article 63A, rather it was an opinion on
the presidential reference. It was not mandatory to implement that opinion like a decision, he added.
The court accepted
the request of Barrister Ali Zafar regarding his meeting with
the PTI founder and instructed
the AGP to make arrangements on
the same day.
