- Justices Mansoor, Munib sought full court hearing.
- CJP cites Constitution to back bench decision.
- Sealed letters placed with Judicial Commission secretary.
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Yahya Afridi’s letter, made public alongside minutes of judges’ committee meetings, has revealed sharp divisions within the Supreme Court over how to hear petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
The documents, covering meetings held between October 31, 2024, and May 29, 2025, show that differences emerged after Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar, in the CJP’s absence, convened a committee meeting on October 31 and decided to fix the case before a full court on November 4, 2024.
CJP Afridi objected to the move, stating in his letter that under the Constitution, petitions filed under Article 184(3) can only be heard by a constitutional bench.
He disclosed that after personally consulting all 13 Supreme Court judges, nine supported hearing the matter before a constitutional bench rather than a full court.
Despite repeated calls from Justices Mansoor and Munib for a full court hearing, CJP Afridi assigned the case to a constitutional bench, arguing that convening a full court was unnecessary and could harm essential judicial harmony while exposing the court to public criticism.
The released minutes also include CJP Afridi’s written response to Justice Mansoor’s earlier letter, in which he cited constitutional provisions — including Article 191A and its sub-sections — to support his stance that only a constitutional bench could hear the matter.
He stressed that under the 2023 Committees of Judges Act, only the constitutional committee of judges may decide case fixation.
According to the documents, CJP Afridi noted that two judges favoured a full court, while the majority disagreed. He communicated this to Justices Mansoor and Munib, along with the reasoning provided by the other judges.
The CJP’s letter further revealed that two sealed letters from the “brother judges” advocating for a full court were received late in the afternoon, prompting him to place them — along with his sealed replies — in the custody of the Judicial Commission’s secretary until its meeting on November 5, 2024.
