Maps
Magazine

LEGAL

Supreme Court reviews reserved seats appeals amid bench formation and live streaming objections
SC constitutional bench hears review appeals on reserved seats; objections on bench formation & live streaming raised. Hearing adjourned till tomorrow.
ND
by News Desk
2025-05-21
Supreme Court reviews reserved seats appeals amid bench formation and live streaming objections

An 11-member constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, convened to hear review appeals related to reserved seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies.

During the hearing, Sunni Ittehad Council’s lawyer Hamid Khan raised objections concerning the formation of the bench and the ongoing live streaming of court proceedings. In response, Justice Aminuddin clarified that not every such application would be addressed immediately; objections will be considered when they are formally numbered. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar added that two judges dissenting on the bench’s formation also believe their votes should not be counted.

Hamid Khan also argued against live broadcasting of the court proceedings. He referenced a petition filed by former Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa to allow live streaming of his presidential reference hearing. Justice Mazhar recounted that the issue of live broadcasting was deliberated in a full court meeting convened by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, which approved a pilot project on live streaming, led by a two-judge committee tasked with outlining the broadcasting procedure. The project currently remains under pilot status, awaiting full court approval.

The bench debated the relevance of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which impacts the composition and jurisdiction of constitutional benches. Justice Aminuddin remarked that a hearing on the 26th Amendment was scheduled but postponed due to petitioner unpreparedness. Lawyers discussed how the amendment and Article 191A of the Constitution govern the hearing of such appeals.

Further, dissenting notes by Justices Ayesha Malik and Aqeel Abbasi were referenced during the hearing. Justice Aminuddin emphasized the importance of such dissenting opinions but advised caution in their immediate weight.

Following Hamid Khan’s arguments, petitioner’s lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan took the floor. He detailed the timeline of decisions from the Peshawar High Court, the Supreme Court’s short order, and subsequent review appeals, highlighting that these appeals were filed before Article 191A came into effect.

The bench also discussed procedural matters such as the applicability of Supreme Court Rules post the 26th Amendment, the number of judges required to hear these appeals, and the potential impact of dissenting judges on the bench’s decisions.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel remarked on the political nature of these cases, referencing previous landmark cases like Panama and the Bhutto reference.

The hearing was adjourned until 11:30 AM the following day, with Makhdoom Ali Khan set to continue presenting arguments.

 
Tagged:

ReservedSeats

SupremeCourt

ConstitutionalBench
Share News: