CJP-led 13-member bench to take up petitions on Monday. Three-member judges committee ruled 2-1 in favour of forming full court bench. All available judges of top court will hear petition filed by SIC against PHC verdict.

ISLAMABAD  -  The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Friday constituted a full court bench to hear a petition filed by the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) against the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) verdict, wherein it denied allocation of reserved seats to the party.  The full-court bench will be headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprise 13 judges of the top court. The Supreme Court has a sanctioned strength of 17 judges. However, posts for three judges are vacant, and Justice Hilali is unavailable due to medical issues.

A day ago, a meeting of the three-member committee of the Supreme Court’s topmost judges—chaired by Chief Justice Isa—was held. In a majority decision of two to one, the committee decided to form a bench comprising all available judges of the top court to hear the case brought by the SIC.

Justice Munib Akhtar, however, dissented. He proposed that a bench comprising the seven most senior available judges should be formed to hear the case. The full court bench is scheduled to hear the case on June 3.

The full court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Amin-Ud-Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A. Malik, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan will take up the matter.

It was May 6 when a three-member bench, headed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, and comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah after hearing arguments on the petitions of Sunni Ittehad Council, Speaker Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Assembly and KP government had suspended over and above initially allocated women and minorities reserved seats to other political parties in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies.

On the last hearing, the SIC counsel submitted that allocation of the reserved seats for women and non-Muslims to the political parties other than the petitioner, Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), is in violation of Article 51(6)(d) & (e) of the Constitution, which provides for proportional representation system on the basis of total number of general seats secured by each political party from the province concerned in the National Assembly.

Advocate Faisal Siddiqui stated that once a political party has been allocated the reserved seats on the basis of proportional representation system, the remaining seats cannot be re-allocated to the same political party. He submitted that as per a letter issued by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) dated 25.04.2024, it has been acknowledged by the Commission that SIC is a parliamentary party having 82 general seats in the National Assembly. Therefore, SIC is entitled to reserved seats as per the proportional representation system in terms of Articles 51(6)(d) & (e) and 106(2)(c) of the Constitution.

However, advocate Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, representing ECP, argued that according to Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution the reserved seats have to be allocated on the proportional representation system only to those political parties who have contested the general elections and won at least one seat in the said elections.

He further contended that since the SIC did not contest the elections and did not win even a single seat in the general elections, it cannot be considered as a political party in terms of Articles 51(6)(d) & (e) and 106(2)(c) of the Constitution, for the purpose of allocating the reserved seats.

Attorney-General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan supported the contentions of the ECP counsel. Both the AGP and the ECP counsel frankly concede that this is a case of first impression involving questions of constitutional law that have not been addressed by the Court earlier.

They stated that the questions of allocation of reserved seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies touch upon the foundational constitutional concept of a parliamentary democracy that the voice of the electorate is truly reflected in the composition of the assemblies.

They said, “Democratic mandate necessitates that the allocation of reserved seats enhances the representativeness of the electorate in the assemblies and upholds the principles of fairness and transparency in the electoral process. It is paramount to prioritize the integrity of the elections so that the Parliament remains a true reflection of the will of the people.”