The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has also filed a constitutional petition in the Supreme Court challenging the recently issued presidential ordinance on the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act.
The petition, submitted by Barrister Gohar Ali Khan on behalf of the PTI, requests that the ordinance be declared unconstitutional.
In the petition, the PTI has argued that following the enactment of the presidential ordinance, all decisions made by the newly formed Supreme Court and Procedure Committee should be annulled as illegal.
Furthermore, the petition calls for the suspension of the newly established Practice and Procedure Committee until the pending constitutional petition is resolved. The PTI has also requested that the old committee be allowed to function in the meantime.
The federation, Ministry of Law, and the secretary to the president of Pakistan have been made respondents in the petition.
A day ago, the Lahore High Court had reserved its verdict on the admissibility of a petition challenging the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance.
Also Read: Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Amendment Act challenged
During the hearing, Chief Justice Alia Neelam was requested to declare the ordinance unconstitutional, following a petition filed by Muneer Ahmed. The chief justice asked the petitioner to explain the grounds why the ordinance was illegal.
The petitioner's lawyer, Azhar Siddique, argued that there was no emergency situation that warranted the ordinance, especially since parliament was in session at the time. He further said after promulgating the ordinance, a new committee was formed, adding that earlier also, the Practice and Procedure Act was brought up.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Amendment Act was challenged in both the Supreme Court and the Sindh High Court also.
In the Supreme Court, Advocate Chaudhry Ehtishamul Haq submitted a petition seeking to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional. The petition argued that the promulgation of the ordinance was against parliamentary democracy and requested that all actions taken under the ordinance be rendered null and void.
Also Read: LHC reserves verdict on petition challenging SC practice and procedure ordinance
The petitioner also urged the court to suspend the ordinance until a decision on the application was made, citing a previous Supreme Court declaration that ordinances should only be issued in emergency situations.
Meanwhile, the Sindh High Court heard a similar challenge against the Practice and Procedure Amendment Act. After hearing arguments, the court, presided over by Justice Yousuf Ali Syed, reserved its decision.
During the proceedings, Advocate Ibrahim Saifuddin argued that the amendment represented a direct attack on the judiciary. Justice Syed noted that the Supreme Court itself had already started implementing the amended Act, with Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa issuing a formal notification.
Justice Syed questioned how the Sindh High Court could interfere in the Supreme Court's affairs, highlighting the complexity of the case.
.jpg)
.jpg)
