Maps
Magazine

LEGAL

Justice Mazhar: Only Constitutional Bench Can Hear 26th Amendment Petitions
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar says only the Constitutional Bench can hear constitutional cases as SC hears challenges to the 26th Amendment. Heated exchanges raise concerns over judicial independence and bench formation.
MH
by Muhammad Hashir
2025-10-20
Justice Mazhar: Only Constitutional Bench Can Hear 26th Amendment Petitions

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar on Monday observed that no benches other than the Constitutional Bench (CB) of the Supreme Court can hear constitutional matters, as an eight-member bench resumed hearings on petitions challenging the controversial 26th Amendment. The bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, includes Justices Mazhar, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Ayesha Malik, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Shahid Bilal Hassan. The 26th Amendment, passed in October 2024 during a late-night parliamentary session, altered judicial powers and tenure — stripping the Supreme Court of its suo motu authority, fixing the Chief Justice’s term at three years, and creating a Special Parliamentary Committee to select the Chief Justice from among the three most senior judges. It also established the Constitutional Bench that is now hearing petitions against the very amendment that enabled its existence. Petitioners, including former SCBA president Muhammad Akram Sheikh, and retired Justice Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, argued that the amendment undermines judicial independence and violates the Constitution’s basic structure. Sheikh urged the formation of a full court of all 24 Supreme Court judges to hear the case, asserting that the current bench, formed under the disputed amendment, lacks authority to strike it down. Justice Mazhar, however, remarked that “the Constitution is clear — no bench other than the Constitutional Bench can hear constitutional matters.” He questioned whether a full court of all judges would not also face a conflict of interest if the CB’s legitimacy were challenged. During the proceedings, Justice Mandokhail asked Sheikh to clarify which bench, if not the CB, could strike down the amendment. Sheikh responded that the entire Supreme Court, as per Articles 176 and 191A, must decide the issue collectively. The bench also questioned whether the CB could issue an order for forming a full court, given Clause 3 of Article 191A that restricts constitutional jurisdiction exclusively to the CB. Retired Justice Rizvi contended that the CB is still part of the Supreme Court and can refer the case to the Chief Justice or the Practice and Procedure Committee for consideration of a full court. The hearing was adjourned until Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. Meanwhile, multiple bar associations, the PTI, and senior lawyers have filed petitions urging the court to annul the 26th Amendment, arguing that it was passed under coercion and lacked the constitutionally required two-thirds majority. Petitioners also challenge related laws — the Practice and Procedure Act 2024 and the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act 2024 — claiming they stem from an unconstitutional amendment. The proceedings, live-streamed on the Supreme Court’s YouTube channel since October 8, will first determine whether the 26th Amendment should be heard by a full court or the existing eight-judge Constitutional Bench before proceeding to the amendment’s validity itself.

Tagged:

SupremeCourt

JudicialIndependence

26thAmendment

JusticeMazhar
Share News: