On Friday, three judges of the Supreme Court urged the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi to follow eight appointments in the Supreme Court until the challenges of the 26th Constitutional Amendment are not resolved.
The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) is ready to hold a meeting on February 11 to consider filling eight vacant seats of judges in the Supreme Court. The JCP approved judicial appointments. The Constitution (26th Amendment) Act, 2024, was restructured to include four MPs, which made several changes in the judiciary.
The constitutional bench of the Supreme Court has raised challenges for the amendment, but there are different demands from a complete court to hear the matter.
A letter, through which has been seen Don Dot ComCJP Afridi and JCP members were sent today on the aforementioned situation. The letter was signed by SC Senior Poice Judge Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Uttar Manala and Aisha Malik.
“It is requested that the scheduled meeting and the appointment of eight new judges … the challenge of the 26th Constitutional Amendment should be postponed, or at least until the constitutional bench decides the applications under the full court. Listen to the challenge and determine it and as long as the issue of transferring judges to the Islamabad High Court and their seniority is eventually determined on the judicial aspect because we are given to understand that such The challenges have been launched, “The letter is written.
The judge said “the current and ongoing condition and some recent developments” have forced them to apply.
He pointed out that the challenges of the 26th Amendment are delayed and anxious before the Constitution Bench.
“For diverse reasons, some of what is clear to people are self -clear, these challenges needed to be tackled immediately and immediately, and therefore, so, so already heard. Had
“Some of us had earlier brought a full court request. However, the matter was dispatched to the constitutional bench, where the first formal hearing was taken after a long delay. Now, to include new judges. The aforementioned meeting has been scheduled… Surprisingly, it is surprising before the next date of hearing in the above mentioned matters before the constitutional bench.
The aforementioned development “can further damage and damage public confidence and confidence in the institution,” the judges said.
He pointed out that public confidence in the judiciary has occupied the “important” at the time how the amendment was requested. He added, “Including new judges, at this stage, which is clearly taking advantage of this amendment, will take a lot of weight on public confidence that today’s institution enjoyed and unnecessarily Make matters more complicated. “
“If the meeting goes forward to reach the purpose of its stated, it will be created. If the constitutional bench accepts applications and instructs the full court meeting to listen to the challenges and decide the amendment challenges. If so, the question must be raised as to who will consist of a complete court for this purpose.
“This is because if eight new judges have held their position by then, it has suggested that it will create an extraordinary situation. On a theory, new appointments will be included in the entire court. This will give rise to public opinion about the dialogue, which will seriously damage the image of the highest institution of justice in the country about its neutrality and freedom.
“On the second idea, the implementation of this amendment, and still at the time of office, only the judges in the court can be. But, some people may argue that there will be no full court and will not claim that In the changed circumstances, the full court cannot sit at all to consider the challenges of the amendment. So, the purely result of this will be the impression of listening challenges through the constitutional bench, which unfortunately reinforces the negatives around the court. Will forgive
The judges questioned why the court is being kept in this position and “whose agenda and interests are presented to expose the court in such a way and maybe we are sorry to say sarcasm?”
“Why place the court on the horns of a pious confusion? Is it not necessary to re -evaluate the case of adding new judges and, for time, put aside? These questions, we believe, ourselves, ourselves They respond.
The four judges emphasized that the Apex court should consider the entire court time and synthesis to maintain its integrity and credibility, which was not just for the highest judicial institution but of the entire legal system.
“Still, any such possibility cannot be effectively eliminated if it cannot be effectively eliminated. Any decision submitted by the full court, if the new judges are involved. If any way is formed, the only viable resolution and option is to postpone public confidence and confidence, “the judges argued.
To follow more.
