Islamabad:
The main judge of the country was the host of some unusual guests at their residence last week, the first meeting with executive officials and then confer with the key opposition party to seek their contributions on the judicial reform agenda, among other matters, what which caused a debate about the role of the Judiciary. in political matters and the implications of such commitments.
In the curious turn of events, the justice of the justice of Pakistan, Yahya Afridi, not only addressed politically loaded, but also advised the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-E-Insaf (PTI) to stay inside the system and Shun Boicots, advice that comes as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI is PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI as PTI and other opposition matches are prepared for an anti -government impulse.
Political experts have described development as unprecedented, noting that the previous main judges have also tried to “fix the system” despite being beyond their constitutional mandate. They argue that committing to a select group of political representatives was an reckless movement and questioned whether the president of the Supreme Court will now extend the same opportunity to other political parties.
At the first meeting, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif had asked CJP for the expedited elimination of cases related to merit taxes that, as of January 2025, up to 33,522 cases per RS4.7 billion are currently pending throughout the entire country in several courts and courts.
Although the Executive Meeting with the main judge was without problems, PTI is a bit roast CJP telling him that he does not recognize the 26th amendment, the same amendment that raided the way for the appointment of CJP, and urged him to decide the requests with respect to The 26th amendment, first, refrain from the ‘court packaging’, put your home in order and do not become an accomplice against PTI.
Referring to the recent letters and requests of the Supreme Court and the judges of the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) related to the 26th amendment and antiquity of the judges of the Superior Court, respectively, as well as to the alleged role of the espionage agencies, the PTI delegation had continued to say that was CJP’s responsibility to fix things in his own backyard.
PTI had also informed CJP in detail about how the founder of PTI, Imran Khan, and his wife, Bushra Bibi, were being treated unfairly and urged him to guarantee the rule of law and the Constitution in the country instead of allowing the Judicial Branch becomes an accomplice against PTI.
“Many past CJP remained under the illusion that they had a much greater role to solve national problems beyond the role assigned by the Constitution,” said the Institute for Legislative Development and Transparency of Pakistan (Pildat), Ahmed Bilal Mehboob .
Pildat’s head argued that previous CJPs had also tried to assume broader responsibilities, but did not lead to anything significant. “The CJPS tried to assume the role, but the judges are not cut for that role or our Constitution defines that role for judges or CJP,” Mehboob said.
To questions about how things have been played in SC and IHC in recent weeks, Mehboob said that “it was not a very wise movement for CJP to meet unnecessary, against past and potentially counterproductive practices.”
In addition, he said: “CJP unnecessarily exposed the political narrative of PTI.” In addition, he added that it will now be difficult for CJP if other political parties also ask to be heard.
Professor Tahir Naeem Malik, from NUML University, said that the recently assumed of CJP to comply with political parties had no precedents, since none invited and met political parties to discuss political, judicial and other issues of another in the Last decades.
“The CJP that comes out of its institutional role and the attempt to resolve the political crisis can be interpreted in different ways, but the simple truth makes sense: it is not its work to meet a few selected political parties, make sure to solve their complaints and then decide His cases, “said Professor Malik.
