The Chief Justice, Mr. Faiz Isa, has initiated hearings in the Supreme Court on applications against the Practice and Procedure Act. Justice Ejaz-ul-Hassan remarked that Parliament can create rules, but it cannot legislate rules.
The authority to make changes in the existing law resides only with the Supreme Court. Justice Faiz Isa met with 5 judges of the Islamabad High Court. Chief Justice stated that the Constitution grants the Supreme Court the authority to establish its practice and procedure.
When the Supreme Court formulates rules beyond the Constitution, everyone should remember that the rules remain within the purview of the Constitution. Justice Ejaz-ul-Hassan argued that the Constitution confines the Supreme Court to legislate rules and laws based on its practice and procedure. The Chief Justice inquired why Article 184(3) was used in Pakistan. Is the reference to human rights seal in the Constitution or the Supreme Court Rules? What was the past use of Article 184? If someone makes an error, can Parliament correct it, just like the United States? Provide an example from Pakistan; if the Supreme Court makes a mistake, can Parliament correct it?
The Chief Justice has also summoned the Attorney General to the rostrum. However, Advocate Umtiaz Siddiqui objected to the delay in providing evidence, leading to a heated exchange between Chief Justice and Advocate Umtiaz Siddiqui.
The lawyer for the petitioner, Umtiaz Siddiqui, said, "I have no objection. You said earlier that we will listen to the Attorney General first and then listen to me. Not hearing us is unjust."
The Chief Justice responded, "Where is it written in the order that you have to be heard first? You can see how you conduct yourself with us. There is a way to speak." The Chief Justice told Advocate Umtiaz Siddiqui, "Look at the past. A person comes and stamps Parliament with rubber stamps. This doesn't happen in America. Our past is very worn out.
The Supreme Court Bar itself did not take a request." The hearing of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act case concluded at 11:30 AM.