By News Desk
ISLAMABAD: The federal government on Thursday moved a miscellaneous petition to the Supreme Court seeking suspension of its judgment related to the Chief of Army Staff’s (COAS) service term till the final decision in federation’s review petition.
The government in its plea requested the apex court “to accept the application and suspend/stay the operation of the impugned judgment dated November 28, 2019, in the interest of justice”. This is the second petition filed in this high-profile case by the government.
On December 26, the law ministry had approached the top court against its detailed judgment, issued on December 16, in which the federation was ordered to legislate on the matter within six months.
The petition filed on Thursday prayed to the court that “the petitioners have a strong prima facie case to succeed; hence the operation of the impugned judgment may be suspended/stayed till the final decision of this civil review petition.”
It further stated that the “balance of convenience lies in favour of the petitioners” and if the “injunction as prayed is not granted, the petitioners will suffer irreparable loss.” The petition also asked the Chief Justice to “constitute a larger bench comprising five judges so as to hear the review petition.”
In its previous petition against the detailed order, the government had pleaded the court to keep the proceedings in-camera. It further argued that the top court’s verdict did not take into account “important constitutional and legal” points. It further stated that the apex court had itself “been giving extensions to additional and ad-hoc judges”, making a case for the government to exercise this discretion as well.
Meanwhile, Federal Minister for Law and Justice Farogh Naseem has decided to represent government in a civil miscellaneous petition filed with the Supreme Court seeking a stay order on the apex court’s previous decision in Army chief extension case.
A petition for Naseem to represent as an advocate has been filed in the Supreme Court. The law minister asserted that he did not require resigning from his portfolio for representing the case in the court and pointed out that a judicial decision allows him to appear as a lawyer without resignation.
