PML-N leader Barrister Zafarullah moved the Supreme Court (SC) seeking ruling over proper criteria for suo-motu notice, transparent criteria for constitution of benches, objective and fair criteria and procedure for judges’ appointment in superior courts, legality of observations made during hearings of the cases amid urging to recruit staff in top court through public service commission.
It is pertinent to mention that under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, the SC can act on its own or on the application of any person with the condition that if the SC considers that any of the rights mentioned in the Fundamental Rights Chapter, is violated and that rights involve the public importance.
Almost five months ago, the incumbent Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa , being senior puisne justice has been reported during an event celebrating the Constitution golden jubilee saying the Constitution gave the top court as a whole the right to take suo-motu notice, adding that this power did not exclusively lie with the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP).
The petitioner made Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Registrar, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Judicial Commission of Pakistan, through its secretary, all the four provincial Chief Secretaries, Islamabad Capital Territory through its Chief Commissioner, Pakistan Bar Council through its Vice Chairman, Islamabad Bar Council through its Vice Chairman, all the provincial bar councils’ Vice Chairmen as respondents in the matter.
Filing constitutional petition, Khan urged the court to pass judgment and issue appropriate orders in response to his plea saying, “The court may also issue] objective and fair criteria and procedure for the appointment of the judges in superior courts; comprehensive guidelines for observations made during the hearings of cases; guidelines for recruitment of the staff in the superior Courts through Public Service Commissions; and any other relief that the SC deems fit in its collective wisdom,”.
The petitioner submitted he is invoking the original jurisdiction of this court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution for enforcement of fundamental rights germane to administration of justice. “Since this is a question of utmost public importance and the most issues highlighted relating to the dispensation of justice pertain to this august court; therefore, the instant petition is being directly filed before this august court, instead of invoking Article 199 of the Constitution.” It says the issues raised in the petition have resulted in inordinate delay in adjudication of cases by the superior courts diminishing the fundamental right to justice.
The petitioner further submitted the issues raised have affected the right that justice must be seen to be done. These have eroded the confidence of the public in this august court that is extremely damaging for the whole edifice of the justice architecture in Pakistan.
“The issues raised in this petition have direct bearing on enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 2A, 3, 4, 9, 10 A, 14, 17, 18, 19, 23 and 25 of the Constitution in addition to its direct impact on chapters of the Constitution dealing the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary,” the petitioner added.
He further submitted, “It states that the court’s jurisdiction has been exercised without a fully developed criterion, leading to criticism from scholars, research institutions, and bars both within and outside Pakistan- It has been exercised for a case of a bottle of alcohol, construction of dams and ousting an elected prime minister. The unwanted exercise under this extraordinary power has resulted in serious economic and political implications.”
“It is therefore submitted that this august court may consider that the exercise of this extraordinary jurisdiction needs utmost care as there is no appeal available despite the admitted fact that all humans are fallible. It shall result in extraordinary responsibility and humility,” the petitioner said.
