• Asks LHC’s chief justice and CEC for ‘meaningful consultation’ to settle row
• CJP says no to continued contempt of judiciary
• PTI’s objection to presence of CJP rejected
• Case based on whether ECP or LHC has primacy in tribunal’s appointment
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday suspended the Lahore High Court’s June 12 notification of constituting eight election tribunals in Punjab as well as the LHC’s determination that its chief justice has the final say in the appointment of tribunals to settle poll disputes.
Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, a five-judge Supreme Court bench suspended the notification to pave the way for meaningful consultation between the recently elevated chief justice of LHC Aalia Neelum and Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja for the formation of tribunals.
The CJP’s order came on the request of Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, who represented the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
The apex court was seized with an appeal by the ECP seeking the final determination whether the commission or the LHC has the primacy in the appointment of tribunals.
Moved through senior counsel Mohmand, the appeal seeks to overturn the LHC’s pronouncement that under article 219(c), read with article 222(b) of the Constitution, the LHC chief justice has pre-eminence or dominance in matters of appointment of election tribunals under Section 140 of the Elections Act 2017.
“We are confident that the meeting will take place immediately after the notification regarding appointment of Justice Aalia Neelum as CJ-LHC as well as taking oath of her office,” said the SC’s order. “The court did not want to encroach upon the domain of the Parliamentary Committee which will have to approve the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s recommendation for the elevation of Justice Aalia Neelum as CJ-LHC.”
The CJP expressed the hope that ECP would not be unreasonable during the meeting between the CEC and LHC’s CJ and would conduct it in a manner so that people should have confidence in the institution.
“Do things in a transparent manner [and] not to face allegation of pick and choose or undermine any institution,” the CJP observed.
Under the LHC’s June 12 notification, eight tribunals were set up for the disposal of petitions pertaining to the general election 2024.
According to the notification, Justice Shahid Karim was appointed head of the tribunal to decide disputes regarding districts of Gujranwala, Gujrat, Hafizabad, Mandi Bahauddin and Narowal. Justice Chaudhry Muhammad Iqbal had to decide cases pertaining to districts of Faisalabad, Chiniot, Toba Tek Singh, Jhang, Pakpattan, Okara, Sargodha and Khushab.
Likewise, Justice Anwaar Hussain was to deal with cases for Lahore and Justice Sultan Tanvir Ahmad had cases for districts of Kasur, Sheikhupura, Nankana Sahib and Sialkot. Justice Asim Hafeez for Bahawalpur, Bahawalnagar, Rahim Yar Khan and Lodhran.
Similarly, Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar was appointed tribunal to settle disputes regarding D.G. Khan, Layyah, Muzaffargarh and Rajanpur districts. Justice Raheel Kamran for Multan, Bhakkar, Khanewal, Vehari and Sahiwal districts, and Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf for districts of Rawalpindi, Jhelum, Chakwal, Attock, Mianwali and Tehsil Sarai Alamgir.
CJP Isa observed that the country is destroyed when two constitutional bodies start fighting each other. He recalled that without undermining the office of the president, the elections date had been decided when the SC requested both the president and ECP to consult each other and come out with a date. This procedure can be emulated, he said.
While pointing towards the ECP counsel, the CJP wondered what was stopping the ECP to ask the LHC’s CJ for a meeting, adding that dispute may arise but one works out things by meeting face to face. Why the disputes should come out to the public, he wondered.
The counsel said consultation was still ongoing, adding that ECP was waiting for the LHC CJ’s reply for the meeting date.
PTI’s objection
At the outset, PTI’s core committee member Niazullah Niazi objected to the presence of CJP in the larger bench.
CJP Isa while dismissing the suggestion said that perpetual scandalisation of judges must stop now and wondered why the matter of Mr Niazi should not be referred to the disciplinary committee of the Pakistan Bar Council for the cancellation of his licence to practice.
“Are we here to be insulted,” the CJP regretted, adding “enough is enough”.
“We are aware of your political affiliations and will not tolerate continued contempt of the judiciary. This must end,” the CJP said, reminding him that the authority to form benches now lies with the Practice and Procedure Committee, marking an end to the era when the CJP had the say in the matter.
When Mr Niazi, alluding to PTI leader Imran Khan, stated that the one in jail also has objections that his election symbol was taken away, the CJP reminded him that the court had provided video link facilities from jail, and no objections were raised at that time. Moreover, he observed, PTI lawyer Ali Zafar also did not raise any objections in the intra-party election case either.
This defamation of institutions must stop to make newspaper headlines questioning how the bench was formed, the CJP said.
The CJP asked petitioner Salman Akram Raja to fulfil a difficult task, saying being a senior counsel, the court expects that he would talk to his junior counsel to behave like an officer of the court rather than the leader of a party.
Published in Dawn, July 5th, 2024
