In a notable turnaround in the Judiciary of Pakistan. The senior-most judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah.Has voiced grave reservations over the recent ordinance passed in aversion to the decision of the Supreme Court. Full Court regarding the Practice and Procedure Act. In this regard, there is a debate on the independence of the judiciary, along with the interplay of parliament. Activities and the courts have now gone a notch higher.
Full Court Decision and the Practice and Procedure Act
The Practice and Procedure Act was also a sublet to and formulated by the Supreme Court’s Full Court. As a necessary step in the protection of the independence of the judiciary. In his correspondence to the Judges’ Committee, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah underlined his position regarding this Act. There is excessive interference from Parliament, which this Act aims to address. And it has taken an above perspective on this matter.
The Parliament treated itself as a ‘closed’ institution regarding potential interference from the business community.
In stark terms, the Full Court asserted that any amendment aimed at permanently affecting. Judicial independence would prompt action from the Supreme Court. As it serves as the custodian of the Constitution. Justice Shah emphasized that the Full Court, not any independent bodies, must exercise authority concerning the Practice and Procedure Act. Particularly in the context of any Meeting of the Full Bench.
Concerns Over the Amendment Ordinance
The obvious concerns with regard to the amendment ordinance, which were letters by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, illustrate the moral issues. He voiced serious worries about the haste to which this ordinance is being passed and whether it is indeed as essential as it is made out to be. Being one of the opponents of this new ordinance, he points out that a judicial assessment of this new law is likely to be necessary for its proper application in protecting the judiciary of the judiciary.
He further added that it was inappropriate to seek amendments from Parliament to fill out an ordinance in a period characterized by a constitutional crisis. Further, dismissing the serious doubts regarding the amendment, Justice Shah categorically stated that this ordinance does not bar the present Judge’s Committee from its activities.
Formation of the New Committee: Dilemma in Focus
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah raised a central concern that officials formed a new committee just hours after issuing the ordinance. He questioned why they excluded Justice Muneeb Akhtar, the next senior judge, from this new committee.
Similarly, Justice Akhhas been active in all judges’ committee meetings since March 11, and a meeting scheduled for the day of the letter was also on his agenda.
Justice Shah revealed his surprise regarding the tendency of dealing with the judge ranked fourth on the seniority list in the formation of the committee and sidelining the second-most senior judge, who, in actual sense, stood in the limelight. All these, he posited, were not the values of opacity and unfair play that the Supreme Court has always held. He recalled that the Practice and Procedure Act was born in the first place to put an end to partisanship and dictatorship in one person and to make sure that the appointment of judges and formation of the committees were democratic and open.
Motion for Imposition of a Full Court
In that correspondence, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah requested the Chief Justice to hold a Full Court so that the concerns of the new ordinance can be addressed. He pointed out that it is incontrovertible that any steps taken under these beatitudes would be against the earlier verdict of the Full Court and would negatively impact the stature of the highest Court of Pakistan, being a contempt of the constitutional vision of governance.
Justice Shah expressed apprehension that Parliament might lose faith in the judiciary’s integrity if a committee made decisions under such unfavourable conditions.
Consequences on the Judicial Independence
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah’s concern is related to a more general aspect of Pakistan in which the judiciary’s independence is put into question. His letter indicates a continual concern over the influence of politics and the outside. Interest in judicial activities that could pose a challenge to judicial independence as an impartial protector of the Constitution. This has raised the issue of the openness and democratic principles of the Pakistani judicial system. It is noteworthy that for Justice Shah, the constitutional hierarchy is non-negotiable. Even under political pressure, to which Individual justices are susceptible.
Conclusion
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah’s letter is also a turning point in the history of the justice system in Pakistan. His criticism of the amendment ordinance. The inception of that new committee and the sidelining of the supervised judges. Highlight the ongoing contention of the battle against judicial capture. Â The respect, trust and confidence of the public in the judiciary will be dependent on the process of this debate.
