Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial declared that next Tuesday, the court will hear two cases – the election commission’s review petition against the apex court’s order to hold elections in Punjab as well as pleas against the review of judgments law – together.
The top judge said both the cases will be taken up together next Tuesday.
RecommendedMust Read
The Supreme Court issued notices to the federation on the pleas against the review of judgements law, while further hearing into the ECP’s review plea in the Punjab elections case was adjourned till Tuesday.
“The court has three pleas against the review of judgments law. They have adopted the stance that converting a review plea into an appeal is wrong,” the SC remarked.
The CJP gave these remarks during the hearing of the election commission’s review petitions against the Supreme Court verdict on Punjab polls.
The petition was heard by a three-judge bench, headed by CJP Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Muneeb Akhtar.
The CJP asked Barrister Ali Zafar if an appeal has been given a new term in the new law. To this, the lawyer said review and appeal are two different things in the law.
The CJP said the law has been limited to Article 184(3).
“We are following the righteous path. Wrongfully interfering in the righteous acts has its own consequences,” CJP Bandial added.
Ali Zafar pleaded to announce a verdict in the case of the elections. The new law regarding review of judgments is unconstitutional, he argued, adding if a law is altered, it should be done through a constitutional amendment.
“One good thing is that both the government and institutions said they will argue in the court, which is legal. Otherwise, they were protesting outside the court,” the CJP remarked.
If a larger bench is formed, it will take up new points also, the CJP remarked, adding it will not be possible to roll back the law.
“The ECP counsel was asked if he could be certain about the elections on October 8. The question was posed after the events that have taken place in the country,” he commented.
Barrister Zafar said the Constitution became ineffective in the country after May 14.
Justice Akhtar asked if the election commission’s review plea should be heard under the previous law. To this, Ali Zafar responded in the affirmative.
This is not a new case, but a review of an already announced verdict, the CJP commented.
On being asked, the lawyer also told the court that the Supreme Court review of judgements law is contradictory to the Constitution and a continuation of the practice and procedure law.
