By Ali Imran
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday reserved its verdict on a set of pleas challenging the recently-enacted Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023, which expands the scope of a review petition.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ijazul Ahsan heard a set of appeals challenging the law and the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) review against the verdict fixing May 14 as the date for holding Punjab Assembly elections.
At the previous hearing, the CJP had observed that laws like the Supreme Court (Review of Judge-ments and Orders) Act, 2023 should have been enacted after taking advice from people like the attor-ney general for Pakistan (AGP), who have experience with litigation.
He had said the apex court would welcome any remedy provided in respect of its orders or judge-ments given under Article 184(3), which allows the Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction in matters of public importance, but added that “we expect that such laws should be formulated carefully”.
During yesterday’s hearing, AGP Mansoor Usman Awan and PTI lawyer Ali Zafar concluded their argu-ments in the case after which the apex court reserved its verdict.
“We will announce the verdict after discussing it among ourselves,” Justice Bandial said. “Let’s see what happens.”
At the yesterday’s hearing, the AGP resumed his arguments and contended that Article 188 of the Constitution — which states that the SC has the power to review any judgment pronounced or any order made by it — did not limit the scope of a review.
“Extending the scope of review in cases pertaining to Article 184(3) is not discriminatory,” he stated, highlighting that appeals were filed in the SC against decisions taken by high courts or tribunals.
“But a case linked to Article 184(3) comes directly to the apex court,” Awan said.
Meanwhile, the CJP said that the SC had not opposed expanding the scope of the review. “The ques-tion is on the manner in which the scope of review was expanding,” he said.
Justice Bandial also pointed out that the Indian supreme court did not give the right of appeal in such cases. “We don’t understand the reason for expanding the scope of review.”
For his part, the AGP said that the top court had the power of review under Article 188 of the Constitu-tion and there was “no limit” as per the law. “But cases and appeals under Article 184(3) cannot be treated in the same way,” he argued.
