#article63a #JusticeMuneebAkhtar #supremecourt #qazifaezisa
Article 63A Revision Case: Content Of Justice Muneeb Akhtar's Letter | Hassan Ayub's Analysis
Article 63A Revision Case: Content Of Justice Muneeb Akhtar's Letter | Hassan Ayub's Analysis
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Let me give you a little reference to what is 63A.
00:03Basically, 63A is that if a political party's parliamentary leader refuses to vote for his MNA or senator,
00:11then he cannot vote on the Defection Clause, on the Prime Minister's election, on the Finance Bill and on the Constitution.
00:19If he votes, his seat will be terminated.
00:23You may remember that in Punjab, when the issue of Hamza Shahbaz's vote of no confidence was brought up,
00:30the Supreme Court of Pakistan went into action.
00:34Earlier, if a MNA or senator defected and went against party policy, his vote would be counted, but his seat would be terminated.
00:44The Supreme Court has decided that your vote will not be counted and your candidacy will also be terminated.
00:51This was the case against him.
00:52Today, when he sat on the bench, Judge Muneeb Akhtar, the senior judge, wrote a letter to Justice Qazi Faiz Issa.
01:07This is his letter.
01:09There are three or four paragraphs of the letter.
01:12We have translated it into Urdu.
01:14We will put it in front of you.
01:16He is saying that there was a case in the Supreme Court, a case of second opinion.
01:21The Supreme Court of Pakistan, which is scheduled to sit in front of the five-point bench today,
01:30formed this bench on 23 September under the constitutional ordinance.
01:36During this time, the senior penal judge raised several important questions through his 23 September note
01:45and mentioned issues related to the ordinance.
01:47After that, the Chief Justice replied to that note through his letter on 25 September.
01:53Instead of answering the questions raised by the senior penal judge on the serious legal questions,
02:00unfortunately, one part of the letter was based on the character of the letter and the other part was based on self-expression.
02:12It is a very unfortunate thing that the Chief Justice himself was involved in this matter.
02:16He did not respond to the questions raised by the senior penal judge.
02:20Today, when this bench was sitting, five members were present.
02:23Muneeb Akhtar did not come.
02:24The remaining four judges and judges were present.
02:27When this bench was sitting, Qazi Faiz Issa said that Justice Muneeb Akhtar has written a letter to the Supreme Court.
02:38Qazi Faiz Issa said that according to the letter, Justice Muneeb Akhtar cannot be a part of the bench at the moment.
02:45Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that his letter should not be considered an apology.
02:51If he has to leave the bench, he should come to the court and be informed.
02:55This was informed by Qazi Faiz Issa.
02:59Qazi Faiz Issa said that Justice Muneeb Akhtar is trying to convince him.
03:03If Justice Muneeb does not agree, a new bench will sit tomorrow.
03:08Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Issa said that Justice Muneeb Akhtar's letter cannot be a part of the court file.
03:14Viewers, this is a very important point.
03:18Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that his letter should be a part of the court record.
03:22Qazi Faiz Issa said that it is not customary to make such a letter a part of the court record.
03:28According to me, the letters of judges are not a part of the court file.
03:32Hassan, I will start with you.
03:34Considering your Supreme Court experience, you have covered this for a long time.
03:39As you know, Justice Muneeb Akhtar has authored this.
03:43In response to Justice Mansoor Ishaq's memorandum, Justice Qazi Faiz Issa wrote a long letter.
03:52Today, this letter has arrived.
03:54What is the way forward?
03:56What is the tradition?
03:57Justice Muneeb Akhtar has also written in his letter that Justice Mazhar Alam Miyakhil,
04:04who is now an ad-hoc judge, was in the minority at that time.
04:07He has also been made an ad-hoc judge.
04:12What do you think about this?
04:14What is happening?
04:16It is a very unfortunate situation.
04:18The reason is that judicial politics among judges has been going on for years.
04:26That is why we discuss such news every day.
04:33We analyze them.
04:35We have to.
04:37If you look at the 63A Bench Constitution, the bench is constituted when all the judges
04:43give their consent.
04:45This means that Justice Muneeb Akhtar has given his consent.
04:50Now, there is only one way to recuse him.
04:52The judge comes to the court and sits.
04:54As you remember, Qazi Faiz Issa and Sardar Tariq Masood came to the case.
05:00Both of them stood up and gave their speeches.
05:02They recused him and left.
05:04This is one way.
05:06But now they have done this.
05:08They did not come to the court themselves.
05:10Although they kept listening to the case all day.
05:12They listened to all the cases till 11 o'clock in the Supreme Court.
05:14After that, there is a break time.
05:16There is a tea break.
05:18After the tea break, they had to reassemble.
05:20Then they reassembled late.
05:22It was delayed for 15-20 minutes.
05:24My sources say that
05:26there will be a meeting of
05:28Practice and Procedure Committee.
05:30If they do not agree,
05:32I think Justice Muneeb Akhtar
05:34has not agreed to the meeting.
05:36Now, the meeting of
05:38Practice and Procedure Committee
05:40will be held in the morning.
05:42Then a new bench will be constituted.
05:44A question is being raised
05:46that Justice Mansoor Ali Shah
05:48is abstaining from the
05:50three-member committee.
05:52I will not be a part of it.
05:54He said to call a full court meeting
05:56to solve this issue.
05:58And put this issue in front of it.
06:00Because when it happened earlier,
06:02we sat together and decided
06:04that you must have read the letter.
06:06I want to ask a question.
06:08If a judge abstains from
06:10the three-member committee,
06:12then what will happen to him?
06:14I will tell you.
06:16Justification, legitimacy?
06:18This is the committee of
06:20Practice and Procedure Committee.
06:22There is a flaw in the law.
06:24The law says that
06:26the review must be completed
06:28within 14 days.
06:30But the judges went on leave.
06:32Justice Muneeb Akhtar said
06:34that he is going on leave.
06:36So, when a deadlock situation
06:38arose, the government
06:40amended the law
06:42through an ordinance.
06:44Now, this is the law
06:46at present.
06:48Justice Mansoor Ali Shah
06:50is one member.
06:52Now, there are two members.
06:54You are ignoring one thing.
06:56One is nominated
06:58by the Chief Justice.
07:00He can appoint anyone.
07:02The other one
07:04will be a part of the law.
07:08But they have the same powers.
07:10Listen to me.
07:12How can they have the same powers?
07:14Of course, they are the same.
07:16But a permanent member
07:18and a nominated member
07:20in any board
07:22or syndicate
07:24is more important.
07:26Let me give you an example from the Judicial Commission.
07:28In the Judicial Commission,
07:30the retired judge
07:32has the same importance
07:34as the senior judge.
07:36But it is not possible
07:38that a Supreme Court Chief Justice
07:40without a Supreme Judicial...
07:42Chief Justice is first among equals.
07:44He has the same importance as the senior judge.