ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial has remarked Election Commission (EC) has to tell first how we can take new ground in review petition.

CJP further remarked counsel should not be changed in review petition. Constitution has not given right to appeal in Article 184 (3). Enhancing jurisdiction should be made clear in Constitution. EC and government are taking now this proceedings seriously. In past government has been raising objection on bench. Sometime full court point was raised and some 4-3 point was raised. Why these have not been mentioned earlier what things EC has now given in writing. Has some other institution forced EC to adopt this stance.

CJP expressed these remarks while presiding over 3-member bench during hearing of review petition filed by EC.

At inception of hearing counsel for EC told court copy of reply of not any respondent including PTI has been provided to him. Give time to review all replies.

CJP remarked should we help you that what has been said in replies. You should give arguments on your petition. You can raise new point if you want to raise on next hearing.

Counsel for EC took plea jurisdiction of review petition is not limited in constitutional cases. Jurisdiction of SC can be increased but cannot be curtailed. Jurisdiction of SC is limited in civil and criminal cases in review case.  Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan remarked resorting to court in connection with basic rights is case of civil nature. One part of Article 184 (3) relates to public interest and second is of basic rights.

Counsel for EC took plea proceedings under Article 184 (3) is not of civil nature.  Justice Munib Akhtar remarked had case of election come through high court then would not it have been civil case. Rights of millions of people are connected with polls. Public interest lies in holding election in 90 days. If appeal comes through high court then according to you court’s jurisdiction is limited. Your stance in review is this that jurisdiction is not limited. Is it not discriminatory treatment with case of basic rights. Why should SC create ambiguity about its jurisdiction.

Justice Munib Akhtar inquired if your plea is this review should be heard like appeal in 184 (3). CJP while addressing counsel for EC remarked you have raised very good points in arguments. But judicial references on these points are not satisfactory.  Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan remarked if plea of EC is accepted then hearing will have to be started afresh in review.  It is not mentioned in Constitution that jurisdiction of review and appeal will be same. Justice Munib Akhtar remarked new stance cannot be taken in appeal too. Hearing of case was adjourned.

Published in The Daily National Courier, May, 24 2023

Like Business on Facebook, follow @DailyNCourier on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.