Islamabad (Web Desk/Agencies): The Joint Sitting of Parliament on Monday passed the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill, 2023 amid protest by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawmakers mostly belonging to upper house.
Last week President Dr Arif Alvi had returned the bill for reconsideration to the Parliament as per the provisions of Article 75 of the Constitution.
The bill, passed by both houses of the Parliament, aims to deprive the office of the chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) of powers to take suo motu notices in an individual capacity.
Minister for Law and Justice Azam Nazeer Tarar moved the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Bill, 2023 which was passed by the Parliament.
The law minister said that bill was discussed in detail in National Assembly and it was also approved by the Senate.
He responded to the objections of the bill and said the “President used inappropriate words while returning this bill and used a biased approach”. He said that he should think “as the President rather than a political worker”.
Tarar said that it was the demand of the bar associations and councils to introduce the bill and they had supported the bill. This bill, he said, was an old demand of the Bar Council which said that the indiscriminate use of 184(3)should be stopped.
The joint session of the Parliament reconsidered it and passed the legislative proposal.
Former law minister Senator Farooq H. Naek and Jamiat Ulma-e-Islam (JUI-F) Senator Kamran Murtaza spoke on the various sections of the bill and were of the view that it was the right time of legislation which would ensure reforms in judicial affairs.
Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) MNA Ms Shaza Fatima Khawaja moved amendments in the bill and the law minister did not oppose them. He said that these amendments will bring more clarity to the judicial affairs and ensure transparency while forming bench.
However, the amendments moved by JI Senator Mushtaq Ahmed were rejected.
It is pertinent to mentioned that the President of Pakistan shall give his assent within ten days, failing which such assent shall be deemed to have been given.
Sub-Article 2 of Article 75 of the Constitution of Pakistan states “ When the President has returned a Bill to the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), it shall be reconsidered by the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) in joint sitting and, if it is again passed, with or without amendment, by the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), by the votes of the majority of the members of both Houses present and voting; it shall be deemed for the purposes of the Constitution to have been passed by both Houses and shall be presented to the President, and the President shall give his assent within ten days, failing which such assent shall be deemed to have been given.
As per the government, the passed bill aims at giving the power of taking suo motu notice to a three-member committee comprising senior judges including the CJP.
It also aims to have transparent proceedings in the apex court and includes the right to appeal.
Regarding the constitution of benches, the bill states that every cause, matter or appeal before the apex court would be heard and disposed of by a bench constituted by a committee comprising the CJP and the two senior-most judges. It added that the decisions of the committee would be taken by a majority.
Regarding exercising the apex court’s original jurisdiction, the bill said that any matter invoking the use of Article 184(3) would first be placed before the above mentioned committee.
The bill says that if the committee is of the view that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II of the Constitution is involved, it shall constitute a bench comprising not less than three judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which may also include the members of the committee, for adjudication of the matter.
On matters where the interpretation of the Constitution is required, the bill said the above mentioned committee would compose a bench comprising no less than five apex court judges for the task.
Regarding appeals for any verdict by an apex court bench that exercised Article 184(3)‘s jurisdiction, the bill said that the appeal will lie within 30 days of the bench’s order to a larger Supreme Court bench. It added that the appeal would be fixed for hearing within a period not exceeding 14 days.
It added that this right of appeal would also extend retrospectively to those aggrieved persons against whom an order was made under Article 184(3) prior to the commencement of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure), Bill 2023, on the condition that the appeal was filed within 30 days of the act’s commencement.
The bill additionally said that a party would have the right to appoint its counsel of choice for filing a review application under Article 188 of the Constitution.
Furthermore, it states that an application pleading urgency or seeking interim relief, filed in a cause, appeal or matter, shall be fixed for hearing within 14 days from the date of its filing.
The bill said that its provisions would have effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, rules, or regulations for the time being in force or judgment of any court, including the Supreme Court and high courts.
