Constitutional amendment required for appeal right in review: CJP

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umer Ata Bandial Wednesday remarked that if the right of appeal was to be given in the review, then constitutional amendment would be required to do so.

As head of three-member bench, Bandial was hearing the petitions challenging the vires of Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023. He observed that the court was examining as to whether the parliament could widen the scope of review through legislation.

“If the right of appeal is to be given in the review, then constitutional amendment will be required to do so,” the CJP remarked, adding that review had constitutional needs, hence it could not be converted into an appeal.

Barrister Ali Zafar, counsel for the PTI Secretary General Umer Ayub, completed his arguments in the petitions, challenging the vires of Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023.

Umer Ayub had filed an application pleading for becoming a party to the instant case and the court had allowed it on the other day.

Barrister Ali Zafar submitted that if the jurisdiction of review under Article 188 of the Constitution was widened under the new law, then questions would be raised on the finality of judgments, given under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.

He elaborated that instead of review, if the right of appeal was given in Article 184(3), then the powers of Article 184(3) would be decreased.

Ali Zafar recalled in view of details regarding review mentioned in 1956 Constitution, the Supreme Court, in its judgment given in 1962, had conceded the facts regarding the review.

Later, the court adjourned the hearing until Thursday (today) when Attorney General Mansoor Usman would commence his arguments.

Earlier, CJP Justice Umer Ata Bandial restrained a lawyer from expressing his ordeal regarding his abduction and asked him to be patient, show courage and fortitude as the country was passing through a transitional period.

A three-member SC bench, headed by the CJP, and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen and Justice Munib Akhtar, heard the petitions challenging the vires of the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023.

Ghulam Mohiuddin, Zaman Khan Vardag and the Jurists Foundation, through its chief executive officer (CEO) Riaz Hanif Rahi, had challenged the vires of the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) 2023.

“I was under pressure to withdraw my petition challenging the SC (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023 and I was kidnapped,” Riaz Hanif Rahi disclosed in the court.

Although, he adopted the arguments of Barrister Ali Zafar, counsel for the PTI in the matter in hand, he told the court that he wanted to read out his application in the court. The CJP, however, restrained the petitioner asking him that they would read it.

After filing the instant petition challenging the vires of the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023, Riaz Rahi had gone missing.

He said that he had appeared before the court the other day and pleaded for taking up his petition also. On Wednesday, he again came to rostrum and requested that he wanted to say something.

He informed the court that he was asked to withdraw his petition and leave Islamabad for his hometown.

“Sir, this is your personal issue, and I keep your application. And if you want, you can meet me in chamber as well,” the chief justice told Riaz Rahi.

The CJP observed that the country was passing through a period of transition; “therefore, we must show patience, fortitude and courage to deal with the current situation of the country”.

“So let us learn to deal with this situation,” the CJP remarked.

Earlier on June 10, the Islamabad Capital Territory Police (ICT) had confirmed the registration of a case after Riaz Hanif Rahi Advocate went missing.

Similarly, the Islamabad High Court had directed the IG Police Islamabad to ensure recovery of the lawyer after contacting the Police Department and intelligence agencies concerned for providing further assistance.

IHC Judge Justice Tariq Mahmood Jehangiri had noted down in the order that son of the lawyer feared that his father was illegally detained by some persons or agency and had sought until June 12 a report on the matter from the Inspector General of Police (IG) Islamabad.