An eight-member constitutional bench of the Supreme Court has allowed live-streaming of the proceedings as it resumed hearing a set of pleas challenging the 26th Amendment, which altered judicial authority and tenure, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.
The 26th Amendment, which was passed by both houses of parliament in October last year, took away the apex court’s suo motu powers, set the chief justice of Pakistan’s (CJP) term at three years and empowered the prime minister to appoint the next CJP from among the three most senior Supreme Court judges.
The Amendment also paved the way for the formation of the constitutional bench, which is now hearing petitions against the very legislation that led to its establishment.
The constitutional bench hearing the pleas pleas filed by various high court bar associations, PTI and others against the 26th Amendment is headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprises Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan.
The last hearing of the case was held on January 27.
When the proceedings were set into motion on Tuesday, Justice Aminuddin Khan said the bench would first hear arguments on requests for a full court hearing of the pleas and objections on constitutional bench. “We will decide on the matter of live-streaming later,” he added.
At that, lawyer Khawaja Ahmad Hassan argued that arguments on pleas seeking a full court hearing should be live-streamed so that the public was also made aware of the grounds on which the request was being made. He then urged the court to first hear arguments on requests for the live-streaming of the proceedings.
To that, Justice Aminuddin Khan remarked that matters of the bench were of relevance to the court, not the public. He asserted that the court would first take up the matter of the full court.
The lawyer for Tehreek-i-Tahaffuz Ayeen-i-Pakistan Vice Chairperson Mustafa Khokhar, Shahid Jameel, informed the court that the SC registrar had raised objections on his client’s plea for a full court hearing. “We filed an appeal against the objections,” he said, requesting the court to first decide on Khokhar’s appeal. He further said that his client had also raised objections over the constitutional bench and urged the court to hear it along with other petitions.
After consultation among the judges, Khokhar’s petition was allotted a number.
The lawyer representing the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government also presented arguments for a full court hearing of pleas against the 26th Amendment. He clarified that they did not have any objection pertaining to any of the members of the existing eight-judge constitutional bench but wanted full court to hear the pleas.
During his arguments, Barrister Salahuddin Ahmed contended that every citizen had the right to information. But, he pointed out, neither the draft of the 26th Amendment was made public nor a public debate took place on it.
He recalled that the 26th Amendment was approved by parliament “in the darkness of the night”, adding that previously, proceedings of the Zulfikar Bhutto case, that of pleas pertaining to the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act and various other cases had been live-streamed.
Following his arguments, Justice Afghan enquired, “So you want that apart from the proceedings taking place in broad daylight, they should also be live-streamed?”
To that, Barrister Ahmed said, “The Amendment was passed in the darkness of the night. That is why facts must be revealed to the public.”
Following that, the bench reserved its decision on requests for live-streaming the case’s proceedings.
Later, the constitutional bench allowed live-streaming of proceedings and adjourned the hearing until 11:30 am tomorrow.
Reporter Amanat Gishkori