Article 63A Revision Case: Content Of Justice Muneeb Akhtar's Letter | Hassan Ayub's Analysis - video Dailymotion

ARY NEWS

#article63a #JusticeMuneebAkhtar #supremecourt #qazifaezisa   Article 63A Revision Case: Content Of Justice Muneeb Akhtar's Letter | Hassan Ayub's Analysis

Transcript

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.

Article 63A Revision Case: Content Of Justice Muneeb Akhtar's Letter | Hassan Ayub's Analysis

Category

Transcript

Recommended