Suo moto notice on Punjab, KPK elections: Case seems heading towards full court
PMLN, PPP and JUI-F raised objections to Justice Mazhar Naqvi and Justice Ijazul Hassan, who is included in a 9-member bench of Punjab and KP elections, Justice Athar Manullah considered it appropriate to make a full court while Justice Mandokhel said it did not make suo moto notice
In the Supreme Court hearing of the spontaneous notice regarding the general elections of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Muslim League-Nun, People’s Party and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam raised objections against the two judges included in the bench.
During the hearing of the case related to the general elections of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in the Supreme Court, objection has been raised against Justice Ajazul Ahsan and Justice Mazahir Akbar Naqvi, who were included in the 9-member bench.
The bench includes Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Manullah.
Read also
Zardari, angry over Maryam’s outburst against institutions, advises PM to restrain
The Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) raised objections to Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Mazahir Naqvi, who were included in the 9-member larger bench in the Spontaneous Notice case, and requested their removal from the bench.
During the hearing, PPP’s lawyer Farooq H. Naik read out the joint written statement of the FPDM parties raising objections against Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi.
During the hearing, PPP’s lawyer Farooq H. Naik said that the two judges have been requested to separate themselves from the bench. The two judges should not hear any case of Non-League and JUI.
The lawyer of People’s Party said that Muslim League-Nun, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, and People’s Party respectfully request that both judges should not be in the bench for a transparent trial.
On the arguments of Farooq H. Naik, Justice Athar Minullah said, “Wouldn’t it be appropriate for the full court to hear the matter, which has been supported by the lawyer of the People’s Party?”
PPP lawyer Farooq H. Naik said that I request the Chief Justice to form a full court bench on the matter, Justice Athar Manullah said why the matter should not be heard in the full court.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that political issues should be resolved in Parliament. You ask your parties why should the court hear these matters? He said that this case does not happen automatically.
The Chief Justice remarked that there are representatives of all four provinces, the Supreme Court Bar should also be represented by lawyers, all of you should be present today and the rest of these matters will be heard on Monday.
Farooq H. Naik said that I also think that the matter should be heard in the full court. Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial remarked that we will discuss admissibility in the first case.
The Chief Justice remarked that the court is also looking into the legal questions raised in the speaker’s petition.
Farooq H. Naik said that he has noted the observations of the court and his party will take instructions on this matter. The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing till 11:30 on Monday.
