“The written order relating to the hearing held on 23.02.2023 included aseparate note of Yahya Afridi, J, who had dismissed the petitions on theground of maintainability. The reasoning recorded in the short order waspersuasive and I had no hesitation in concurring with the decisionregarding dismissal of the petitions. I had reiterated my decision byrecording my note in the order dated 24.02.2023.
I have had the privilege of reading the detailed reasoning recorded by mylearned brothers, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Jamal Khan Mandokhail, JJs andI agree with their opinion, particularly regarding the final outcome of thepetitions and the suo motu assumption of jurisdiction by a majority of 4 to3 because this was the understanding in the meeting held in the anteroom on27.02.2023. It is noted that I had not recused nor had any reason todissociate myself,” read the note.
Justice Minallah further said it was explicitly observed that the powerconferred under Article 184(3) of the Constitution must always be exercisedwith circumspection and utmost caution.
“The manner and mode in which these proceedings were initiated haveunnecessarily exposed the Court to political controversies. It has invitedobjections from political stakeholders in an already polarised politicalenvironment. “
Read Top Stories
“The objections have also been submitted in writing. This obviously hasconsequences for the trust the people ought to repose in the impartialityof the Court. The Court, by proceeding in a premature matter, will bestepping into already murky waters of the domain of politics. It is likelyto erode public confidence. The assumption of suo motu jurisdiction initself may raise concerns in the mind of an informed outside observer. Inthe circumstances, the rights of litigants whose cases are pending beforeus would be prejudiced, besides eroding public trust in the independenceand impartiality of the Court. This could have been avoided if a Full Courtwas to take up these cases,” he remarked.
He also took aim at the political parties of the country stating, “It isironic and unimaginable for the political stakeholders to involve the Courtin resolving political disputes which ought to have been settled in theforums created for this purpose under the Constitution. It is also alarmingthat the conduct of the political stakeholders and their politicalstrategies would create unprecedented political turmoil and instability inthe country”.
