Islamabad: Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, has stated that the right to review is granted by the constitution, and priority should be given to the constitution rather than to judges’ convenience.
He emphasized that failing to schedule a hearing for a review petition promptly would be unjust.
According to media, the 17th meeting of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedures Committee, chaired by the Chief Justice, has issued a communiqué on the meeting’s conclusions.
During the meeting, the issue of scheduling review petitions related to decisions on reserved seats was discussed.
Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Muneeb Akhtar noted that only the 13 judges who heard the main case could hear the review petitions.
The communiqué states that the judges observed that the detailed judgment had not yet been issued, and Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Muneeb Akhtar mentioned that many judges were on summer vacation or traveling abroad.
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa argued that the right to review is constitutionally guaranteed and should be prioritized over judges’ comfort.
He asserted that failing to schedule the review for a hearing promptly would be unjust.The committee, by a majority vote, approved the postponement of review petitions related to reserved seats until after the holidays.
However, the Chief Justice disagreed with the majority decision, suggesting that summer vacations should be canceled to expedite the review hearings.
According to the communiqué, Justice Muneeb Akhtar commented that judicial vacation rules allow for vacation to be announced, with the new judicial year starting in the second week of September.
He also noted that once judicial vacations are announced, there is no provision in the rules to cancel them.
The Chief Justice, differing in opinion, stated that under Section 7 of the Practice and Procedure Act, urgent matters should be scheduled for review within 15 days.
He urged the Supreme Court to schedule the review within 15 days, otherwise, the case would become ineffective.
He added that if the Supreme Court does not schedule the review within 15 days, the case could become ineffective due to surpassing the 15-day limit set by the majority decision.
The Chief Justice also noted that his two fellow judges provided two reasons for not hearing the review: the detailed judgment was still pending, and it was to be written by the same eight judges.
The Chief Justice concluded that no one’s rights should be stripped by the court’s actions, and failing to schedule the review hearings until the detailed judgment is issued would render the constitution and law meaningless.