The coverage of cases in the Supreme Court, the highest court of the country, in the media hardly comes close to any other part of the world. It is said that judgments should speak, not the judge. It is the responsibility of a judge is to make a decision according to the law and constitution. When there are no judgments, we can see what happens. The differences between judges are out in the open. Benches are being formed and broken, but decisions do not seem to be made.
When the Supreme Court of Pakistan gave the date for the election, the polls should have been held but it did not happen. The federal cabinet devised a law to reduce the powers of the Chief Justices simply because they passed verdicts not favoured by the government.
However, Parliament is supreme. No one can dare raise a word against it. Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that judiciary respects Parliament and the decision on holding elections was spurned. The Islamabad High Court remarked that the government is a guest for two month and should go home with dignity. This does not seem so given the daily press conferences of the federal ministers.
This interesting fiasco occurred in the Supreme Court when a nine-member larger bench was dissolved. The formation of the bench with senior judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa among them raised eyebrows given his much hyped conflict with the chief justice. Analysts easily understood that bench would explode, either there will be result in the case or no result from the bench.
Justice Isa – who will take the helm as the next chief justice – recused himself from sitting on the bench hearing petitions on the trial of civilians in military. He complained being not part of previous benches and his judgments being bypassed. His colleague Justice Tariq Masood agreed and also excused himself and ultimately the bench was dissolved
The chief justice continued hearing of the case once again by forming a 7-member bench. The matter was also of a sensitive nature as petitions were heard against conducting civil cases in military courts. It is clear that the public loses confidence in the judiciary is decisions are made marred by personal differences and political pressure. The respected judges of the superior judiciary need to sit together and formulate a strategy so that there are no hang-ups in the verdict. Otherwise, the situation will remain without any change.
