After the petition was withdrawn, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the government’s much-hyped “Constitutional Package” cannot be introduced or enacted by parliament.
Legislation called the Constitutional Package includes proposals for a number of constitutional amendments, one of which is to extend the term of the highest judge.
Experts are concerned that the amendments that have been proposed would virtually reduce the judiciary’s independence by limiting the SC’s jurisdiction to civil and criminal appeals and petitions.
A group of lawyers, led by Abid Shahid Zuberi, a former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, filed a petition in September to prevent the government from introducing the bill to parliament.
The request was recently returned by the SC enlistment center’s office yet was fixed for hearing in a valuable reason list gave on Saturday. The Balochistan Bar Council also submitted a petition against the amendments last week through Zuberi.
Today, a three-part seat — headed by Boss Equity of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and furthermore including Equity Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Equity Shahid Bilal Hasan — took up the supplication.
Consensus on the legislation has gotten closer in recent days, despite the fact that the ruling coalition’s previous attempt to present the amendments in the Parliament was unsuccessful last month due to concerns raised by opposition parties.
A day ago, the heads of the PML-N, PPP, and JUI-F met at Jati Umra, where the government parties almost got Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s support.
A special parliamentary committee, on the other hand, has given PTI more time to share its own draft after it requested it.
The hearing Advocate Hamid Khan made an initial appearance on behalf of the petitioners. He requested permission to withdraw the plea from the court.
“Could it be said that you were [Hamid Khan] named as a direction just to pull out the application?” CJP Isa inquired. “Abid Zuberi himself could have withdrawn the application,” he observed.
The chief justice mentioned that an additional similar application had been scheduled for an objection-filled hearing.
