By Irum Saleem
Justice Muneeb Akhtar’s Second Letter has fully exposed game of the PMLN government to get passed Constitutional Package.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar’s letter to the Registrar of the Supreme Court:
“I wish to record my protest regarding the order of today’s hearing,” wrote Justice Muneeb Akhtar in his letter.
“The order from today’s hearing is not a judicial order,” he stated.
“A five-member larger bench was supposed to hear the case,” Justice Muneeb Akhtar wrote.
“A four-member bench sitting in court cannot hear the review case related to Article 63-A,” the letter continued.
“I was sent the order from today’s hearing,” he wrote.
“My name is mentioned in the order, but there is no signature after it,” Justice Muneeb Akhtar noted in his letter.
“While the four judges sitting on the bench are honorable, today’s hearing did not proceed according to the law and rules,” the letter explained.
“The review case of the interpretation of Article 63-A was scheduled to be heard before a five-member bench,” the letter stated.
“How did four judges sitting issue an order?” Justice Muneeb asked in his letter.
“The order sent to me is not a judicial order,” Justice Muneeb wrote.
“I record my protest on this and state that Paragraph 4 of the order has no legal standing,” Justice Muneeb wrote.
“How can a five-member bench be reduced to a four-member bench?” the letter questioned.
“What happened is entirely different from all precedents, laws, and rules and is unacceptable,” Justice Muneeb wrote.
“What has been sent to me is not a legal court order; it has no standing,” he emphasized in his letter.
“A five-member larger bench was supposed to hear the case,” Justice Muneeb Akhtar reiterated in his letter.
“A four-member bench sitting in court cannot hear the review case related to Article 63-A,” he repeated.
“I was sent the order from today’s hearing,” Justice Muneeb Akhtar wrote again.
“My name is mentioned in the order, but there is no signature after it,” he noted.
“While the four judges sitting on the bench are honorable, today’s hearing did not proceed according to the law and rules,” the letter reiterated.
“I had already detailed my position in the first letter,” Justice Muneeb Akhtar wrote.
“The order regarding the review case on the interpretation of Article 63-A holds no significance,” he concluded.
Article 63A of the Constitution.
Amid reports of rifts among the top judiciary, Justice Munib Akhtar on Monday skipped a hearing on a petition seeking a review of the 2022 verdict on the defection clause under Article 63A of the Constitution.
The review plea, filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) in 2022, sought a review of the Supreme Court’s May 2022 decision where it ruled that the votes of defecting lawmakers will not be counted.
A five-judge Supreme Court larger bench comprised of Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and Justices Akhtar, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel took up the petition seeking the review of the defection clause.
The SCBA, in the review petition, contended that the court’s opinion on Article 63A was not in accordance with parliamentary democracy established by the Constitution.
Through its May 17, 2022, judgement, the Supreme Court had declared that the vote cast contrary to the parliamentary party lines under Article 63A of the Constitution should not be counted.
However, the SCBA petition argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to disregard defecting votes to be a stop-gap arrangement for ensuring stability during the Constitution’s first decade.
The petition argued that the interpretation of Article 63A adopted by the Supreme Court amounts to rewriting/reading into the Constitution when the court itself had held in the past that the Constitution was to be interpreted strictly in accordance with the clear and express language and that there was no room to supply additional meaning to constitutional provisions. PAK DESTINY
