Justice Musarat Hilali, a member of the Constitutional Bench, remarked on the request to challenge the appointment of former Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa as the Chief Justice of Balochistan High Court that “Do not get personal in the cases, Justice Qazi has now retired, leave the Qazi.” Sahib’s life.’ Thereafter, the Constitution Bench dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner lawyer Riyaz Hanif.
The Supreme Court On the first day of the Constitution Bench today, a six-member bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, 18 Cases Hearings out of which 15 were dismissed as ineffective.
A total of Rs 60,000 fines were imposed on the petitioners for baseless litigation while three cases were adjourned by the Constitution Bench.
After the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the Constitutional Bench heard the cases on Thursday. Along with Justice Aminuddin Khan, other judges on the bench include Justice Jamal Mandukhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Musrat Hilali. Justice Ayesha Malik was not part of the bench today.
All on measures taken against environmental pollution The provinces Request report from
The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court sought a report from the provinces on all the measures taken so far related to environmental pollution since 1993. Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that ‘Look what has happened in Punjab and Islamabad.’ The additional attorney general said that the importance of this case has increased in the present circumstances.
Justice Naeem Afghan said that this case has been going on since 1993, Lahore city has spread from Wagah border to Sheikhupura on one side, DHA and other societies are being built on agricultural lands, which are affected by the earthquake. I don’t want high-rise buildings to be built there, how are we treating future generations, promote flat culture, it is not necessary to build 6-6 kanal bungalows.’
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that ‘according to the report of the Environmental Agency of Islamabad, everything is good, according to the report of the year 2021, all the steel mills are following the SOPs. Is this case to be heard? Institutions will work only if the court keeps asking for reports. Why could not the Chairman of Environmental Change Authority be appointed? The authority will be active only when the chairman is appointed.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that ‘Also pay attention to the fact that pollution is spreading due to the adulteration of petrol, pollution is also among the diseases affecting the country, there is a need to know the cause of the disease and treatment.’
Justice Aminuddin Khan said that ‘only paperwork will not work, take practical steps, if detailed reports come in the next hearing, then the case will be settled.’ The court adjourned the hearing for three weeks on the request of the Additional Attorney General.
Case of appointment of Qazi Faiz Isa as Chief Justice of Balochistan High Court
The appointment of Qazi Faiz Isa as the Chief Justice of Balochistan High Court was challenged by petitioner Riaz Hanif Rahi. A six-member constitution bench headed by Justice Aminuddin heard the case. The Constitution Bench dismissed the revision petition filed against Qazi Faiz Isa.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that ‘this is a review application, on such an application I will request the head of the bench to refer the matter to the Pakistan Bar Council, the case cannot be reopened. Do you want to reopen the case?’
Petitioner lawyer Riyaz Hanif told the court that the Supreme Court heard the Bhutto case after 40 years. I am telling the facts to the court, I don’t have the record but the record can be called from Balochistan. The appointment of Qazi Faiz Isa did not include the consultation of the Chief Minister at that time.
On behalf of the petitioner, Justice Aminuddin said, ‘Why are you not answering the questions that the court is asking you? Tell the law how consultation with the Chief Minister is necessary?’ Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said to the petitioner on this occasion, ‘Why are you getting angry? Listen to the court.’
Justice Musrat Hilali remarked that ‘Don’t get personal in the cases, Justice Qazi has now retired, leave Qazi Sahib’s life.’ Thereafter, the Constitution Bench dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner lawyer Riyaz Hanif.
Three applications dismissed with a fine of 60,000
The constitution bench of the Supreme Court dismissed the petition against the foreign assets and bank accounts with a fine of 20,000.
This section contains related reference points (Related Nodes field).
Justice Mandukhel remarked that it is the Parliament’s job to legislate. How Election Commission can legislate on foreign account assets.’ Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said that ‘the petitioner has not made any legal point in the petition.’
Petitioner Mushtaq Awan told the court that ‘I am of the opinion that contesting elections on foreign assets or bank accounts should not be allowed.’ Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar replied that it is the work of Parliament to legislate on this issue. Whose foreign assets or bank accounts have not been mentioned?’
Justice Aminuddin Khan rejected the request and said that ‘the petitioner should approach the elected representative of his constituency for legislation on the matter.’
The petition to ban the marriages of Pakistanis with foreign women was also dismissed while the court imposed a fine of 20 thousand rupees on the petitioner. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that if such requests are allowed, there will also be requests to stop marriages.
The petition against the legislation during the PDM regime was also dismissed by the constitution bench with a fine of Rs 20,000. Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel remarked that ’60 thousand cases are pending due to such cases.’
The Constitution Bench rejected the plea to reschedule the 2024 general elections
The Constitution Bench dismissed the petition to reschedule the general elections as ineffective. The Attorney General told the court that ‘Now that the elections have taken place, this application has become ineffective.’ Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel remarked that ‘lawyers did not come, they should be fined heavily.’
#Justice #Qazi #retired #leave #life #Justice #Musrat #Hilali
How does the Supreme Court ensure that personal biases do not influence decisions regarding the appointments of judges, as demonstrated in the dismissal of the petition against Justice Qazi Faiz Isa?
**Interview with Justice Musarat Hilali on Recent Supreme Court Proceedings**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Justice Hilali. Recently, the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Bench dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of former Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa. Can you share the key reasons behind the court’s decision?
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** Thank you for having me. The decision was grounded in the principle that once a judge has retired, it is important to respect their life and legacy after office. Our focus during the proceedings was not only on the legitimacy of the appointment but also on avoiding personal attacks against Justice Qazi. We made it clear that these discussions should not become personal.
**Interviewer:** The petitioner, Riaz Hanif, raised concerns about the lack of consultation with the Chief Minister during Justice Isa’s appointment. How did the bench address this point?
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** The bench sought legal clarity on why such consultation was deemed necessary by the petitioner. It was essential to underscore that the court expects all parties to respond to its inquiries respectfully and decisively. Ultimately, the legal basis for reopening this case was insufficient.
**Interviewer:** There was also a discussion about the responsibilities of Parliament and the Election Commission regarding foreign assets and bank accounts. Could you elaborate on the court’s stance?
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** Certainly. The court emphasized that legislative matters fall within the purview of Parliament. The Election Commission cannot legislate on such issues; it can only enforce the rules set forth by law. The petitioners did not present strong legal points supporting their claims, which further complicated their case.
**Interviewer:** The Supreme Court imposed fines on several petitioners for what was described as baseless litigation. What message does this send about the court’s approach to frivolous cases?
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** It underscores the importance of judicial efficiency and the need for legitimate cases to be presented. The imposition of fines serves as a deterrent against frivolous filings that only serve to waste judicial resources. We are committed to ensuring that the court’s time is dedicated to matters of substance.
**Interviewer:** Lastly, the court has requested reports from provinces regarding measures against environmental pollution. How significant is this issue for the court?
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** Environmental pollution is a major concern that affects public health and future generations. By requesting these reports, we aim to ensure that practical steps are being taken since the case has been ongoing since 1993. It is crucial for us to encourage proactivity from relevant authorities, as mere paperwork will not suffice.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Justice Hilali, for your insights on these important legal matters.
**Justice Musarat Hilali:** Thank you for the opportunity to share our perspective.
