Many court reporters and journalists made claims related to the Judicial Commission of Pakistan meeting, which approved a seven-member bench with representation from all four provinces.

One of the claims was that Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, the JCP chairman, opposed the constitutional bench. It was reported some senior judges and lawmakers were also of the same opinion during the meeting.

To clear the confusion, Spotlight with Munizae Jahangir tried to confirm such reports from the horse’s mouth. The Aaj News programme, which airs on the news channel from Monday to Wednesday, had a JCP member Akhtar Hussain on its show.

Hussain, a Pakistan Bar Council representative, stated that CJP Afridi and senior judges Mansoor Ali Shah and Munib Akhtar believed that the constitutional bench should consist of all Supreme Court judges, with the CJP at the helm.

He confirmed that Opposition Leader in Senate Shibli Faraz and Leader of Opposition in the Nationa Assembly Omar Ayub supported the views of the chief justice of Pakistan and senior-most judges.

The PBC representative recalled the parliamentary committee meeting formed for the nomination of the CJP under the 26th Constitutional Amendment. The committee considered the three senior-most judges—Yahya Afridi, Mansoor Ali Shah, and Munib Akhtar—and appointed the judge ranked third as the chief justice.

Another perspective was that the next senior judge following such three should lead the constitutional bench, prioritising seniority from all provinces, he added.

While describing the atmosphere of the JCP meeting, Hussain stated that it was conducted in a “very positive environment,” with CJP Afridi managing the discussions and participants “effectively.” But Faraz and Ayub argued that the meeting was “ineffective” since the 13 judge, who is supposed to head the constitutional bench, had not been nominated, he added.

In response, the commission members reminded them to refer to the Constitution, which stipulates that the absence or refusal of a judge does not render the meeting ineffective. Justice Akhtar also supported this point.

Also, read this

Justice Munib and Justice Mansoor write letter to CJP Afridi to list 26th amendment case

Govt bulldozes bill in NA, Senate to increase number of Supreme Court judges from 17 to 34

Complete details of Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Amendment Bill

It is noteworthy that the JCP’s announcement mentioned Ayub’s objection regarding the quorum in light of a member’s absence. Nonetheless, the majority decided through a vote that the meeting was valid under the Constitution and could continue even in the absence of one member.

The government narrowly passed constitutional amendments on October 21 giving lawmakers more power to appoint top judges, who have issued a series of recent decisions favouring opposition chief Imran Khan.

Under the reforms, new benches would be formed of senior judges from across the country to weigh exclusively on constitutional issues, at the core of disputes between the government and PTI in the Supreme Court.