Sunday, October 6, 2024, 5:08 AM
BREAKING NEWS
**Israeli military says Iran has launched missiles towards Israel *Interceptions heard in Jerusalem *IDF urges Israelis to go to 'protected spaces' if sirens heard
Sunday, October 6, 2024, 5:08 AM
Home » SC rejects PDM’s objections to bench hearing pleas against audio leaks commission

SC rejects PDM’s objections to bench hearing pleas against audio leaks commission

Justice Ijazul Ahsan says the objections raised were 'an attack on the judiciary'

by NWMNewsDesk
0 comment

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) government’s plea objecting to the bench hearing petitions challenging the audio leaks commission.

Announcing the reserved judgment, Justice Ijazul Ahsan said the objections raised were “an attack on the judiciary”

The five-member like-minded larger bench of the apex court, led by CJP Bandial, has charged the PDM government with delaying the court proceedings as well as non-implementation of its orders about the holding of Punjab Assembly elections.

“The court has faced all such actions of the federal government with tolerance, forbearance and restraint. However, it goes without saying that any refusal to implement a final and therefore binding judgment of the court can be visited with consequences laid down in the Constitution.”

banner

The former coalition government had raised objections over the presence of Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Muneeb Akhtar on the bench hearing the case.

In the written order, the SC stated that the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan had raised objections over the presence of three judges included in the bench citing a “conflict of interest”.
The order maintained that it was an accepted and settled constitutional principle, acted upon several times in the constitution of commissions, that whenever a sitting judge was intended to be made a member of the body, the permission of the CJP had to be sought first.

The order further noted that as the federal government appeared to have acted unilaterally in this matter, a “constitutional principle” of the highest importance had been, prima facie, “breached”.

You may also like

Blogs

Latest Articles

© 2024 News World Media. All Rights Reserved.