In a rare move, four senior judges of the Supreme Court have written a letter to Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, raising strong objections over the procedure for approving court rules.
The letter, signed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Ayesha Malik, and Justice Athar Minallah, pointed out that the recently issued rules were never placed before a full court for proper approval. According to the judges, such an important matter cannot be decided through circulation, which is generally reserved for minor administrative tasks.
The judges highlighted that although they were invited to attend a full court meeting, the agenda was limited to addressing the issues created by the new rules. They argued that this approach was flawed since the procedure for approving court rules had itself been bypassed from the beginning.
"How can we sit to amend something that was never validly approved in the first place?" the judges questioned, stressing the need for transparency and collective decision-making within the judiciary.
On Friday, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has written a seven-page letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi, raising six pressing questions over key judicial matters, including the handling of the 26th Constitutional Amendment petitions.
The letter by Justice Shah was sent directly to the Chief Justice after several earlier communications reportedly went unanswered. He emphasized that, as the most senior judge after the CJP, it was his duty to seek clarity on institutional concerns that had already surfaced publicly during the Judicial Conference on September 8.
In his detailed letter, Justice Shah asked why no meeting of the Practice and Procedure Committee was called and why the Supreme Court Rules were approved through circulation instead of a full court session. He further questioned the method of individual consultations on changing the policy for issuing dissenting notes.
Read More: Bilawal Bhutto acknowledges Maryam Nawaz’s efforts in flood-hit Punjab
Other queries included the issuance of a general order regarding judges’ vacations, the decision not to form an original full court to hear petitions against the 26th Amendment, and why judges were being treated more as a “controlled force” rather than being allowed greater independence.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah underlined that these questions are not just internal matters but issues of public trust in the judiciary. He expressed hope that the Chief Justice would address them openly during the ceremony marking the start of the new judicial year.
