Judicial independence: Supreme Court’s Justice Mansoor Shah irked by withdrawal of cases

#Judicial #independence #Supreme #Courts #Justice #Mansoor #Shah #irked #withdrawal #cases

ISLAMABAD: Senior Supreme Court judge Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has expressed concern over the effects of withdrawing cases from the judicial benches, saying that it compromises judicial independence.

Referring to recent events, he asked whether committees could withdraw cases if they felt that a decision might go against the government.

Justice Mansoor made these remarks on Tuesday during a contempt of court hearing headed by a two-member bench headed by him.

The case arose when the registrar of the Supreme Court failed to schedule a hearing on a case related to the bench’s powers despite a court order.

At the start of the hearing, the judges asked the registrar why the case was not scheduled as directed. The registrar explained that the matter, initially meant for a constitution bench, was mistakenly assigned to a regular bench.

Justice Aqeel Abbasi expressed doubts and asked why the mistake was realized only now and whether his inclusion in the bench was the real issue as he had already heard the matter in the High Court.

Justice Mansoor further inquired about the role of the Practice and Procedure Committee in this matter whether it convened independently or acted upon the request.

The registrar admitted sending a note to the committee, prompting Justice Mansoor to ask for a copy of it. On review, the note contradicted the registrar’s earlier statements.

Justice Mansoor pointed out that the note did not admit any error but instead suggested constituting a new bench based on the order issued on January 16, which had already defined the bench for the case. was

The Registrar explained that the Practice and Procedure Committee had referred the case to a Constitution Bench, which reviewed the relevant amendments and scheduled cases accordingly.

However, Justice Mansoor emphasized that once a case is before the bench, the involvement of the committee ceases.

Allowing committees to withdraw active cases undermines judicial independence. He questioned whether the cases could be withdrawn simply because the verdicts could not be in favor of the government.

Justice Aqeel further said that the schedule of the constitutional amendment case was postponed until the matter comes before his bench. He questioned the urgency of withdrawing cases, especially when tax-related cases did not require constitutional review.

Justice Mansoor revealed that two meetings of the committee were held on January 17, one regular and the other under Article 191-A(4). He noted his absence from the former, deeming his participation inappropriate in view of the court order. He asserted that an administrative decision cannot override a court order.

The senior judge highlighted that court orders are binding and asked the registrar to clarify whether the committee of judges had passed any orders allowing the withdrawal of cases from the bench.

He remarked that such actions threatened judicial independence, citing the tenure of the Peshawar High Court Registrar to highlight his awareness of these issues.

The Registrar replied that the Practice and Procedure Act is an Act of Parliament, empowering the Committee to withdraw cases.

Justice Mansoor warned that such precedents risk eroding confidence in the judicial process, leading to unfavorable outcomes before the case is withdrawn.

In light of these complications, the Supreme Court has appointed senior advocates Hamid Khan and Munir A. Malik as amicus curiae to assist the court.

The bench also asked whether the committee of judges could change the division of the bench despite the existing orders.

Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman argued that the court cannot ask such questions in contempt of court proceedings.

Justice Mansoor assured them that their arguments would be heard in detail.

The hearing of the case related to judicial bench powers has been adjourned till tomorrow (Wednesday).