Pakistan Bar Council announced that a ‘black day’ would be observed by lawyers across the country against the Supreme Court’s order of blocking the Supreme Court Practices and Procedure Bill in a preemptive judgment.

The announcement was made by PBC Vice Chairman Haroon ul Rasheed in a press talk after a ‘Representative Conference’ of bar councils from across Pakistan.

He also said that it had been a long-standing demand of the bar councils that the right of appeal should apply to suo motu cases. But when parliament had made the law it had been struck down by the court.

“The protest will continue until the court takes back order preventing the bill from taking effect,” he said. He said that such orders will never be accepted by the ‘legal fraternity’.

A statement after the conference also said that the court should show ‘restraint’ so as not to accelerate the political crisis across the country. It also said that lawyers would protest across Pakistan to save democracy and the constitution.

“Chief justices have been using suo motu for their personal motives,” Rasheed said, adding that the practice had caused harm to Pakistan.

He also said that the issue of election delay was already being heard in the high courts but suo motu notice was taken on the basis of the notice by two judges.

He said that notice should actually have been taken about the dissolution of the assemblies. The Punjab and KP assemblies were dissolved at the instruction of Imran Khan in January this year.

“The suo motu notice was taken as per the wishes of a particular political party,” Rasheed said.

The statement also says that an All Parties Conference should be alled where all major political parties decide to hold the election across the country on the same date. It also says that political disputes should be decided by deliberations among politicians, not through courts.

The Supreme Court had ordered that the new bill clipping the CJP’s sole powers to take suo motu notices and form benches will not take effect, even before it had received presidential assent.

The bill had been passed by parliament as court ordered that elections should be held within the constitutionally mandated 90 days. The government and the election commission have objected to the bench that gave the decision and maintained that the court cannot make such decisions on matters that are to be decided by the ECP.