- “Full court” term is not mentioned in Article 191-A: Justice Mazhar.
- Adds CJ has “no authority” in full court-related matters anymore.
- Specific judges cannot be included in full court: Justice Mandokhail
ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court’s Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar on Monday remarked that constitutional matters “will only be heard by the constitutional bench”.
Justice Mazhar passed these remarks as the SC constitutional bench, headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din, heard several petitions filed against the 26th Constitutional Amendment passed by parliament in October 2024.
Other members of the bench include Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Ayesha A Malik, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhter Afghan, and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan.
“Whether one likes it or not, the term full court is not mentioned in Article 191-A. Constitutional matters will only be heard by the constitutional bench.”
Justice Mazhar added that the petitioners want the chief justice to refer the matter to a full court, adding that, “under Article 191-A, the chief Justice no longer has that authority [to do so].”
Inquiring the counsel representing one of the petitioners, Justice Mazhar remarked that some parties suggested the exclusion of judges from the full court appointed after the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
“The judges you wish to include in the full court are indeed judges but not part of the constitutional bench,” he remarked.
During the hearing, Justice Jamal Mandokhail observed that a full court cannot mean a bench made up of specific judges. “You can only request a full court,” he told Advocate Abid Zuberi.
Justice Mandokhail said that if judges appointed before the 26th Amendment are to be included, some other judges would have to be left out.
Advocate Zuberi clarified that he is not suggesting the removal of any judges from the Supreme Court.
Justice Mandokhail then asked, “If the Judicial Commission declares that all Supreme Court judges are part of the constitutional bench, would you accept that?” To which Advocate Zuberi replied, “Yes, absolutely — we would accept it.”
The proceedings of the case were streamed live as per the earlier decision of the apex court. The court, after hearing the arguments, adjourned the hearing till tomorrow (Tuesday).
It is to be noted here that multiple political parties, including Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), as well as various bar associations and former presidents of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), had challenged the amendment back in October 2024.
The tweaks in the constitution, which have since come into effect, require the legislature to pick the chief justice, fixing the top post’s tenure, and forming constitutional benches.
Key points of 26th Amendment
- Chief Justice of Pakistan’s (CJP) tenure fixed at three years.
- Constitutional benches to be established at the SC and high courts.
- Senior-most judge of each bench to serve as presiding officer.
- Parliamentary committee to nominate new CJP from panel of three most senior judges.
- Committee to propose name to PM, who will then forward it to president for final approval.
- JCP, led by CJP and three others, responsible for appointment of SC judges.
- JCP to monitor judges’ performance, report any concerns to Supreme Judicial Council.
- Complete eradication of Riba (interest) from country by January 1, 2028.
