ISLAMABAD:
As the clock ticks towards his retirement, Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial has kept the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) hopes of finding relief in crucial matters alive.
The chief justice of Pakistan has formed a special bench to take up Imran Khan’s three pending petitions, which were filed during his trial in the Toshakhana (gift repository) case. The bench will take up the case on Aug 23 (tomorrow).
Interestingly, the timing of the case’s fixation comes just as the Islamabad High Court has already scheduled the PTI chief’s appeal against his conviction for hearing today (Tuesday).
The coincidence has left lawyers wondering if the timing may have a bearing on the proceedings at the IHC. IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq has been facing criticism from the PTI supporters for perceived delays in granting relief to Imran.
However, the Supreme Court Registrar Office has returned Imran’s most crucial constitutional petition. The petition seeks relief in cases where his pre-arrest bails were rejected on technical grounds. The office cited multiple objections to the constitution petition.
In another significant development, the Supreme Court has entertained a petition filed by Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Abid Zuberi and other representatives.
The petition seeks direction to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to hold elections within 90 days.
They have also requested the apex court to set aside the Council of Common Interests (CCI) Aug 5 decision to notify the digital census. It is expected that this petition will also be fixed for hearing this month.
The outcome of this petition holds significance in the current political climate, as the establishment opposes holding elections within 90 days, while the PTI strongly advocates for them.
Lawyers believe that CJP Bandial may have aimed to make a decision on this petition prior to his retirement. However, they question whether he will receive support from other judges to fix the petition in his final days.
To ensure fair proceedings, the lawyers are urging the CJP to seek consensus within the Supreme Court. They fear that failure to do so could result in a similar situation as the Punjab Assembly elections, where elections were not held despite a clear order from the Supreme Court on May 14.
CJP Bandial may try to give judgement on another Imran’s petition challenging amendment in National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999.
Likewise, the fate of Imran and other petitions against the trial of civilians before military courts under the Army Act is also hanging in the balance. It will be interesting as to whether the CJP will be able to issue judgement on these petitions before his retirement.
A larger bench led by CJP Bandial has yet to complete proceedings on the petition challenging the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023, which regulates the discretionary powers of the chief justice.
The bench on April 13 stayed on the effects of this law before its enactment. Interestingly since then, CJP Bandial is exercising his discretionary powers on stay orders.
Senior puisne judge Qazi Faez Isa has questioned the suspension of the law by the larger bench and has not been part of any bench after the law’s enactment.
The judge has also already raised questions about the legality of benches formed after the enactment of this law.
After taking charge as the CJP, Justice Bandial could not improve the working relationship with senior puisne judge due to several reasons. Due to internal clashes, SC has become a ‘weak institution’.
Observers expected that history will be able to better judge who was responsible for the current situation.
In an ongoing case, a larger bench led by CJP Bandial has not yet made a decision on the petition filed by the SCBA president regarding the audio leaks commission.
Legal experts believe that regardless of the outcome, there will likely be reviews filed against these judgments during the tenure of the next CJP, Qazi Faez Isa.
Imran’s ‘right to fair trial’ plea
The Supreme Court Registrar Office on Monday refused to entertain the petition filed by ousted prime minister Imran, challenging his “political victimisation” and the denial of his “right to a fair trial” over rejected pre-arrest bail pleas.
The PTI chief’s legal team had filed a constitutional petition before the top court, seeking relief in cases where his pre-arrest bail pleas were rejected on technical grounds. The petition invoked Article 184(3) of the Constitution, requesting the protection of the petitioner’s fundamental rights and the reversal of the trial court’s dismissals of pre-arrest bail pleas.
It moved the court to restrain the relevant authorities from arresting the PTI chief in cases “where his pre-arrest bail applications were dismissed without due consideration of case merits, thereby ensuring his rightful access to fair trial”, according to the notice issued by the SC Registrar Office.
However, the office rejected the petition, deeming it “not entertainable”.
In a written notice, the office pointed out that the petition failed to demonstrate the involvement of any question of public importance or the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
The conditions for invoking Article 184(3) were not satisfied in the prayer filed on behalf of Imran, according to the notice.
Source link: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2431939/glimmer-of-hope-for-pti-in-cjs-final-days