ISLAMABAD – Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa has denied a request for additional delays in the intra-party election review case involving PTI lawyers, observing that delaying tactics are being employed and that the Supreme Court will not provide the desired headlines.
A SC three-member bench led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar and Musarat Hilali. No lawyer appeared on behalf of PTI; however, Akbar S. Babar was present in court.
Akbar S. Babar’s lawyer, Ahmad Hassan, mentioned that Advocate Hamid Khan had submitted a request for postponement.
Chief Justice Isa asked Babar’s lawyer to read paragraph two of the postponement request, which discussed Hamid Khan’s family commitments.
“This is more like a novel; I have never seen such a request for postponement before,” remarked the Chief Justice.
He further noted that this case was supposed to be heard on the proposed cause list for May 29, and Advocate Ali Zafar had submitted a general request for postponement until June 4. He added that one of the bench members had undergone open-heart surgery, criticizing those who turned the intra-party election case into a matter related to the party’s symbol. “Let the critics read the judicial decision before making comments, and if they want to propagate outside, that’s fine, but it’s not appropriate to come to court,” he said.
Chief Justice Isa remarked that he had never seen a request for postponement based on family commitments before; typically, such requests are made due to bereavement or health issues.
Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar inquired whether Barrister Ali Zafar had presented arguments in this case.
The Chief Justice responded that it is not standard practice anywhere in the world to request a preferred bench or date. “We cannot create separate laws for anyone. If you don’t want to pursue the case for ten years, then don’t.”
Justice Musarat Hilali added that this is not a proper procedure, noting that not even a junior lawyer was present.
“They want headlines, but the Supreme Court will not provide any such headlines,” stated the Chief Justice.
He also mentioned that there is now a legal right to change lawyers during a review. “It is clear that delaying tactics are being used. They wanted headlines, but the Supreme Court will not give them that.”
The Chief Justice then asked Akbar S. Babar’s lawyer when the decision in the intra-party case was made. The lawyer replied that a brief decision was delivered on January 13, followed by a detailed decision on January 25, with general elections held on February 8 and the review submitted to the Supreme Court on February 6.
The Chief Justice concluded that this implies that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was not harmed by the order. The request for review was included in the proposed cause list for May 29, and Barrister Ali Zafar’s general request for postponement was until June 4. After that, one member of the bench underwent open-heart surgery, and no request for urgent hearing of the review was filed. Now, when the case is scheduled for hearing, no one appears, and then propaganda is spread outside.
Later, the court issued an order stating that Advocate Hamid Khan submitted a request for postponement through Advocate On Record Anis Muhammad Shahzad, mentioning family commitments. The request only indicated that there was a family commitment, without specifying what it entailed, and the Advocate On Record did not appear himself.
In addition to Hamid Khan, other lawyers in this case include Niazullah Niazi, Ajmal Tor, and Barrister Gohar. If Hamid Khan was unavailable, another lawyer could have represented the case.
The order stated that under the Practice and Procedure Act, the law now grants the right to change lawyers in review cases, and no further postponements will be granted. In consideration of the requirements of justice, the hearing is adjourned, with the next hearing scheduled for October 21.
The court instructed that a copy of the order be provided to the lawyers and postponed the hearing until October 21.
