ISLAMABAD      -    A nine-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan will today resume hearing in the suo motu matter regarding the announcement of date for holding general elections for Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies.

The nine-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah will conduct hearing of the suo moto and the petitions of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association and the Speakers of the Punjab and KP.

The chief justice on 22-02-23 had taken suo moto of the delay in holding polls in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, saying that there appeared to be a “lack of clarity” on the matter.

The suo motu notice was taken by the top judge after President Dr Arif Alvi earlier had unilaterally announced April 9 as the election date in both the provinces after his invitation for consultations on the matter was turned down by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

The top judge took notice on the note received from the Registrar office and constituted a nine-member bench for the hearing. “It has been brought to my knowledge that it is over more than a month that provincial assemblies of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were dissolved,” observed Chief Justice Bandial.

Previously, the PPP, PML-N and JUI had requested recusal of Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi in the nine-member bench hearing suo moto on delay in the announcement of dates for general elections of the Punjab and KP assemblies. On the last hearing in the apex court, a joint statement was read by PPP counsel Farooq H Naek requesting Justice Ahsan and Justice Naqvi to recuse themselves from hearing the case.

In the statement, it was requested that both the apex court judges "recuse themselves from hearing any matter involving Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarian (PPPP), Jamiat Ulema Islam (Pakistan) (JUI-P) and their leadership” for the “interest of justice, fair play and to protect the fundamental right to a fair trial and due process”. Naek also noted that he had not yet received a copy of the court order and requested that notices be issued to all concerned parties.

The Chief Justice remarked; “We will mark everyone here present and hear arguments on Monday,” noting that the representatives of all four provinces were present in the courtroom. The PPP lawyer further objected to the inclusion of Justice Ahsan and Justice Naqvi in the bench and referred to Justice Jamal Mandokhail’s statement made in the previous hearing objecting to the suo moto notice.

However, Justice Athar Minallah said that the matter pertained to Article 184(3) of the Constitution and questioned why it should not be heard in a full court. Naek replied that he did not want to go into the details but maintained that he believed that the case should be heard by a fullcourt bench. Justice Bandial remarked that “we will discuss the admissibility of the case first”.

To this, the PPP’s counsel said that admissibility is the most important issue, as is the matter of composition and seeing how the bench was constituted. In his remarks, Justice Jamal Mandokhail said that political matters should be settled in the parliament, questioning why they do not resolve the issue of interpretation of the Constitution in the parliament. Justice Bandial said that in normal circumstances, citizens knocked at the door of the court “but today, the Constitution of Pakistan has knocked on our doorstep.”

The PTI leaders welcomed the suo motu notice taken by the CJP and said that it was a good step because holding elections in the Punjab and KPK was constitutional demand. “I hope that the top court will timely decide this matter,” said PTI leader Fawad Chaudhary. Responding to question whether the PTI would accept whatever the decision was announced by the Supreme Court, Fawad Chaudhary said that they would accept the decision because there was no other choice.