Islamabad:
A cold war in the highest Judiciary seems to have deepened even more when Puisne’s senior judge, Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, could not fly to Saudi Arabia for attending two events in arbitration due to lack of ex-pakistan license.
It was learned that Judge Shah was invited to deliver key notes in two events in the week of arbitration in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, organized by the Al Baraka forum and the organization of the Islamic Cooperation Center-Arbitration Arbitration (OIC-AC) .
During the week, Judge Shah also wanted to make Umrah before the start of the Sacred Month of Ramazan.
The senior judge of Puisne had asked the president of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Yahya Afridi for the former Pakistan, which remained unanswered, forcing Judge Mansoor to cancel his trip to Saudi Arabia since its leaves could not be sanctioned.
It should be noted that Judge Shah was the only judge of the Supreme Court of a Muslim country invited to the event sponsored by the Saudi in the ‘Week of Arbitration’ in Riad, which is a high profile event.
Lawyers believe that arbitration is more significant for Pakistan, and the presence of Judge Shah in Riad would have helped develop cooperation between the judiciary of Muslim countries. This could have led to developing a joint arbitration center for Muslim countries and an international arbitration center in Pakistan.
They also wonder why the minutes of the committee working under the Law on Practice and Procedure of the 2023 Supreme Court are not shared on the SC website. The practice stopped since the CJP holder assumed his office.
Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is also a member of the three -member committee. Previously, four judges, who opposed the elevation of the judges of the Court superior to the Apex court, were eliminated from the key administrative committees under the CJP Restructuring Plan Yahya Afridi.
CJP Aphridi reconstituted several committees, replacing senior judges with the Junior. Those excluded from critical roles included Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Judge Munib Akhtar, Judge Ayesha Malik, Judge Athar Minallah and Judge Aqelh Ahmad Abbasi.
If the Aphridi CJP constituted a complete court to listen to requests against the 26th constitutional amendment, the situation could have been different, the legal experts said.
Two judges, Judge Mansoor Ali Shah and Judge Munib Akhtar, who formed the majority in the pertinent committee, had ordered the constitution of a full court to listen to the requests in the first week of November. However, instead of listing the case, CJP Aphridi convened a meeting of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to select judges for the Constitutional Bank. The Constitutional Bank has not yet decided requests against the 26th constitutional amendment.
Subsequently, a bank of three judges led by Judge Shah had raised a question if the regular bank could be prohibited to judge the issues related to the interpretation of the law and the Constitution after the 26th constitutional amendment. However, the case was removed from that regular bank by the committees.
A Division Bank of the Apex court led by Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah said that the members of both committees violated the court order and withdrew the case of the regular bank. The bank commented that the members of the committees have committed contempt; Therefore, the full court must be constituted to initiate the procedure.
However, the members of the Constitutional Bank were visibly upset and set aside the judicial orders of the regular bank. Recently, the Federal Government also presented appeals within the Court against regular bank orders in a matter of contempt.
It is being seen that the dissident judges faced always difficult times since the mandate of former CJP Saqib Nisar.
The lawyers believe that if the clash continues between the high -level SC judges, the superior judiciary will weaken even more and the situation will be favorable for the beneficiaries of the 26th constitutional amendment.
