SC Benches’ Jurisdiction: AGP Objects To Appointment Of Amicus Curies

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah observes case has no connection with 26th Constitutional Amendment

ISLAMABAD: (UrduPoint/UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News-Jan 22^nd, 2025) Justice Mansoor Ali Shah remarked that the case has no connection with the 26th Constitutional Amendment while Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan objected to the appointment of amicus curies in the case related to the jurisdiction of judicial benches in the Supreme Court.

A SC two-member bench comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Aqeel Abbasi heard the case. Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan appeared before the Supreme Court and raised objections over the appointment of amicus curies, arguing that the appointed assistants are the lawyers representing petitioners challenging the 26th Amendment.

During the proceedings, the court appointed two more amicus curies Khawaja Haris and Ahsan Bhoon.

The Attorney General stated that the court’s jurisdiction in contempt of court cases is very limited and that a written statement from the recipient of the show-cause notice should be submitted.

Yesterday, Judicial Officer Nazar Abbas, who was removed from his position, appeared before the court. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah told him, “Our intention was not what you think, but we wanted to know why the case was withdrawn. Something has happened to you as well, though we are unsure of your role in it,”.

The Attorney General argued that under criminal original jurisdiction, the matter is between the court and the alleged contemnor, reiterating that the appointed amicus curies are the same lawyers who challenged the 26th Amendment.

Justice Aqeel Abbasi acknowledged the Attorney General’s point while Justice Mansoor Ali Shah suggested appointing another assistant from the same group.

The Attorney General stated that under the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the authority to form benches now lies with the constitutional committee. However, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah reiterated that “this case has nothing to do with the 26th Amendment. If one starts fearing everything, that’s a different matter,”.

The court directed Nazar Abbas to submit a written response by tomorrow. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, addressing the Attorney General, noted that he was smiling and asked him to suggest a name for the judicial assistant. The Attorney General smiled and replied, "I am not suggesting any Names. The central case of the Customs Act is not before you yet."

Judicial assistant Munir A. Malik appeared via video link, stating that “a judicial order cannot be altered by an administrative order. Under Section 2A of the Practice and Procedure Law, the matter of forming a full court can be referred to the administrative committee,”.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked Munir A. Malik whether the court could issue such an order in a contempt of court case. Malik responded, “This issue should be resolved permanently, as it is linked to judicial independence,”.

Judicial assistant Hamid Khan started his arguments, after which the court appointed two more amicus curies Khawaja Haris and Ahsan Bhoon, bringing the total number of amicus curies in the case to four.

In the previous hearing, Munir A. Malik and Hamid Khan were appointed as amicus curies.

Munir A. Malik stated that “a judicial order can only be overturned by another judicial order,”. Lawyer Shahid Jamil mentioned that a similar bench reshuffle occurred in Peshawar, prompting former CJP Qazi Faez Isa to issue a note. He added, “Once a roster is formed in the Supreme Court, it keeps changing. Sometimes, a judge is removed from the bench while the case is underway, which should not happen,”.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah remarked, “So, once a case has started, it cannot be withdrawn”.

Lawyer Shahid Jamil responded, “A case can be taken up where questions arise,”. Justice Shah observed, “the questions arise only when the case is not before a bench,”.

Shahid Jamil argued that all cases should first go through the Section 2 Committee. However, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah remarked that so far, the committee under Section 2A has only exercised its authority to form regular benches. The committee could only alter a bench if the case was not already before a court.

Shahid Jamil emphasized that the judicial commission must nominate constitutional benches. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that “all cases will first be reviewed by the central committee,”. Jamil disagreed, stating, “Not all cases can be sent to the constitutional bench committee first. This overlap will always exist, and the matter can be referred to the committee for full court formation,”.

Hamid Khan highlighted that the Constitution mentioned the Chief Justice of Pakistan and other judges. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah humorously asked the Attorney General, “Do we fall under the definition of ‘other judges’?”

Justice Aqeel Abbasi remarked, “Now, we are merely 'others'!”, which caused a laughter in the courtroom as the Attorney General smiled.

Munir A. Malik suggested that all the cases reaching the Supreme Court should first be reviewed by the Practice and Procedure Committee and that a three-member committee should determine which cases go to constitutional benches. He said that “the committee cannot replace a judicial order with an administrative order. I also saw yesterday’s press release,”.

He further remarked, “It was stated that the case was mistakenly assigned to the regular bench. Even if it was an error, a judicial order had already been issued,”.

The top court adjourned further hearing until Thursday (tomorrow).