ISLAMABAD: The constitutional bench Thursday commenced hearing of pleas, pending for several years, including some important cases regarding environmental pollution across the country as well as review petition against a judgment dismissing a plea challenging appointment of Justice Qazi Faez Isa as chief justice of Balochistan High Court (BHC).
The six-member bench, established under the 26th constitutional amendment, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard 18 cases including some frivolous petitions, which were disposed of with fine imposition on petitioners. Other members of the bench included Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarat Hilali and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.
The judicial commission, set up under the 26th Constitutional Amendment on November 5 by a majority 6-5, had constituted a seven-member constitutional bench.
On Thursday, Justice Ayesha A. Malik was not on the bench for being abroad; hence, a six-member constitutional bench heard the cases.
A meeting of the committee, constituted under Article 191A (4) of the Constitution, held the other day under the chairmanship of Justice Aminuddin Khan, head of the constitutional bench, had resolved to take up pending cases that fall within the jurisdiction of the constitutional bench.
The meeting was attended by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar telephonically from Karachi. The registrar’s office apprised the committee of the pending cases that fall within the jurisdiction of the constitutional bench. After thorough consideration, the committee had resolved that priority should be accorded to the oldest cases.
“In view of the unavailability of Justice Ayesha A. Malik on Nov 14-15, 2024, it was resolved that a bench comprising all available judges should be constituted to proceed with cases on these dates,” the committee meeting had declared.
On Thursday, the constitutional bench dismissed a review petition, filed by Riaz Hanif Rai, against a judgment, dismissing a plea against the appointment of Justice Faez Isa as the BHC chief justice. Later on, former chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar had dismissed the plea declaring legal the appointment of Justice Qazi Faez Isa as the BHC chief justice. Rai had filed a review petition in 2016 against the judgment.
Petitioner Riaz Rai, when started to argue, the bench observed that the instant matter had lost its relevance. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail observed that it was a review petition and could not be reopened.
The petitioner, however, cited the Bhutto reference case, adding that the court took 40 years to decide it. Justice Musarat Hilali, however, observed that Bhutto’s case was different with different facts. “Don’t be personal in this case, and leave alone Qazi Faez Isa now,” Justice Musarat Hilali told the petitioner, adding that it was not a forum for political speeches.
Riaz Hanif Rai, however, stressed that the court should first review the grounds for the appeal. He contended that the chief minister was not consulted on the appointment of Justice Faez Isa as the BHC chief justice.
The court observed that in review petition, one had to point error in the main judgment. “Show us where the law states that consultation with the chief minister is mandatory for appointment of chief justice of a high court,” Justice Aminuddin asked the petitioner. The head of the bench added that the consultation process could be informal as well.
Justice Mandokhail suggested the head of the constitutional bench to refer the matter to Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) for taking action against the petitioner. Meanwhile, the bench dismissed the review petition.
Similarly, the constitutional bench also dismissed for being infructuous a pela that had sought rescheduling of 2024 elections, as it was prayed before the court that the elections should be held between February to March.
Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman told the court that as elections had taken place on February 8, 2024, the matter had become infructuous.
Likewise, the bench also dismissed with Rs20,000 fine a petition, filed by Mahmood Akhtar Naqvi, seeking ban on government servants for contracting marriages with male and females, possessing foreign nationalities.
Petitioner Naqvi appeared before the bench on video link from Karachi.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar observed that it was a prerogative of Parliament and questioned as to how the court could place a ban on it asking the petitioner to cite any law in this regard.
The petitioner, however, told the court that he was unwell and sought time. The court dismissed his petition after imposing Rs20,000 on him.
The constitutional bench also dismissed a plea seeking disqualification of lawmakers possessing business and assets abroad.
The court imposed Rs20,000 fine on the petitioner with the observation that it was the prerogative of Parliament to make legislation on the issue.
The petitioner Mushtaq Awan, however, contended that one should not be allowed to contest elections having assets and bank accounts abroad.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar observed that names of persons were not mentioned in the petition having foreign assets and bank accounts abroad.
Justice Aminuddin observed that the petitioner should contact his public representatives in his constituency for making legislation in that regard.
Similarly, the constitutional bench also dismissed a pela filed against legislation made during the PDM government declaring it as frivolous after imposing Rs20,000 fine on the petitioner.
Similarly, the constitutional bench also heard cases related to environmental issues. During the hearing, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar observed that all environmental matters would be examined. The judge questioned as to why the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was not playing its role in addressing the serious issues. The matter is pending before the court since 1993; therefore, it had to be addressed once and for all.
Justice Musarat Hilali observed that housing societies were being constructed everywhere in the country. Justice Jamal Mandokhail pointed out that environmental pollution was a nationwide issue, not limited to Islamabad, and pointed out that vehicles smoke was a major cause of pollution.
“Whether efforts are being made to address this chronic issue,” Justice Mandokhail questioned.
Justice Hilali raised concerns about the proliferation of poultry farms and marble factories in Mansehra, as well as the pollution affecting some of scenic locations of Swat. She pointed out that no construction could take place without the Environmental Protection Agency’s approval. “Housing societies continue to spread despite the agency’s presence,” Justice Hilali remarked, regretting that marble factories were being set up next to school buildings in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).
Meanwhile, the constitutional bench sought comprehensive reports from all provinces and by clearly mentioning as to what effective measures have been taken for combating environmental pollution and adjourned further hearing in the matter for three weeks at the request of the additional attorney general.
Similarly, the constitutional bench also dismissed for being infructuous plea related to narcotics besides dismissing a petition challenging the appointment of one Qazi Jan Muhammad for being infructuous as well.
The bench also disposed of a plea pertaining to reviewing the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act for its being ineffective. Justice Mandokhail said the matter had become ineffective now.
The AAG said review to the extent of questioning was sought on the parliament’s authority. Justice Aminuddin Khan observed that Parliament’s power to legislate had been accepted in the Practice and Procedure Act case.
The constitutional bench held that in the Practice and Procedure Act case, the standard operating procedure for parliament’s legislation was determined. The constitutional bench would also take up some 16 cases on Friday (today).
