27th Constitutional Amendment: Full court rejected proposal that judges resign en masse
ISLAMABAD: A senior judge’s proposal for en masse resignation was discussed in the Full Court Meeting but the majority of judges disagreed with it.
Later, the meeting unanimously approved the Supreme Court Amendment Rules 2025, said sources.
According to the Supreme Court (SC) sources, around 13 judges attended the Full Court Meeting called in connection to discuss the resignation by two judges. Two of the 23 SC judges, former judges Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah, have already resigned.
Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Aamir Farooq and Justice Baqir Najafi did not attend, as they had been nominated as judges of the Federal Constitutional Court. Also, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Ayesha Malik and Justice Musarrat Hilali could not attend due to personal engagements.
The meeting convened in the chamber of CJP Yahya Afridi. At the outset, some judges said it is a sad day that some of our brother judges have resigned and the meeting must discuss the judiciary’s response to the 27th Constitutional Amendment, sources said.
One of the judges asked what kind of response that might be. He went on to ask what constitutional and legal authority the Supreme Court has to stop parliament from exercising its legislative powers.
At this point, some judges suggested writing a letter to the government on behalf of the Full Court, sources said. The chief justice said the judges should have discussed the issue with him instead of writing letters. “My doors are always open for everyone. I don’t think it’s the right thing to write a letter to the government,” he said.
The apex court has the power of judicial review, which the court can use to determine what is ultra vires, he said; asking, otherwise, what powers judges have to stop the parliament from legislation. How can the parliament be prevented from passing a law, he asked.
Despite chief justice’s response, several participants of the meeting kept insisting on institutional response. A senior judge said there is only one way of giving “institutional response”, and that is resignation by all judges, including the chief justice, from the Supreme Court. However, majority of judges disagreed with the proposal. Later, the meeting took up the Supreme Court Amendment Rules 2025 and approved them.
-
Princess Beatrice, Eugenie Enter Crisis Talks As Parents Sins Start Bleeding Onto Them: ‘Help Me Girls!’ -
US Ambassador To France Charles Kushner Barred From Meeting French Government After Missing Meeting -
Moby Sings Praises Of Eminem After Calling Rapper 'misogynist, Homophobe, Racist And Antisemite' 25 Years Ago -
'Tediously Monastic' Moby Reveals How Spiritual Discipline Impacted His Love Life -
New Zealand PM Christopher Luxon Backs Removing Ex-Prince Andrew From Line Of Succession -
Bella Hadid Looks Back On Opportunities She Lost In A Year Amid Lyme Treatment -
Meghan Markle’s Family Shares Important News Amid Estrangement -
Charley Crockett's Canadian Tour Cancelled After Being Denied Entry Into Canada Over Past Felony Conviction -
BAFTA, BBC, And Tourette’s Advocate John Davidson Issue Formal Statements For His Onstage Slur -
Kanye West's Malibu Beachfront Mansion Enters Controversy Again As Ex-employee Seeks $1M In Alleged Unpaid Wages -
Devin Vassell, Wembanyama Shine In Spurs Victory Over Detroit -
Tom Hanks To Lead Experimental Biopic About Distant Relative Abraham Lincoln -
'CIA' Starring Tom Ellis Promises Fresh Take Beyond FBI Franchise -
Congressman Tony Gonzales Faces Resignation Calls Amid Investigation -
Royal Family Not Allowed To Play THIS Fun Game: ‘It Gets Too Vicious’ -
Heidi Klum Exposes Harsh Modeling Rule She Faced While Expecting