IHC judges' letter: PTI rejects CJP Isa's seven-member suo moto case bench
- By Web Desk -
- Apr 01, 2024
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Monday rejected the constitution of a seven-member larger bench of the Supreme Court to hear the suo moto case on six Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges’ letter, ARY News reported.
PTI spokesperson Raoof Hasan demanded a full court bench to conduct a hearing on the case while urging for the proceedings to be live telecast.
According to Hasan, his party will not accept the verdict of the seven-member bench as he alleged that it comprised “favourite judges.”
Earlier today, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Qazi Faez Isa took suo moto notice of IHC judges’ letter in which they alleged interference by intelligence agencies.
Six serving judges of Islamabad High Court (IHC) penned a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), urging it to summon a judicial convention to review the matter of “interference of intelligence agencies with judicial functions”.
Read more: CJP takes suo moto notice of IHC judges’ letter
IHC top judges – including Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiyani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Baqir Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir, and Justice Salman Rafat Imtiaz – penned the letter to SJC in the aftermath of Supreme Court’s March 22 judgement on Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui’s dismissal case.
The Supreme Court’s larger bench includes Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Jamal Mandokhail, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.
The hearing will take place at 11:30am on Wednesday.
It is pertinent to mention that former CJP Justice (retired) Tassaduq Hussain Jillani refused to head the inquiry commission on the IHC judges’ letter.
The federal cabinet had named Tassaduq Hussian Jillani to head the inquiry commission to probe allegations of the IHC judges of interference by intelligence agencies.
In a letter penned to PM Shehbaz Sharif, the former CJP said he has reviewed the letter penned to the Supreme Judicial Council and it does not fall under Article 209.