Pakistan's new bench grants relief to ex-CJ Isa, dismisses 2018 petition

In a landmark first ruling, the Supreme Court’s recently-formed six-member constitutional bench granted relief to former Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. It dismissed a 2018 review petition challenging his appointment as the Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court in 2009.

On its inaugural day, the new judicial bench took swift action, clearing a backlog of longstanding cases and issuing fines totaling PKR 60,000 ($214) to petitioners for filing frivolous claims.

Hearing CJP Isa's case, the bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and including justices Jamal Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Musarrat Hilali, reviewed arguments brought forth by the petitioner’s counsel, Riaz Hanif Rahi.

Rahi argued that Isa’s appointment bypassed established protocol, claiming no one could be appointed directly as chief justice without prior service as a judge and asserting that the then Balochistan Chief Minister did not send the appointment summary.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

In response, Justice Mandokhail clarified that a review petition could not re-litigate the original case and emphasized that the court was not an appellate bench.

After extensive questioning, the court dismissed the review petition, affirming that Isa's appointment had adhered to due process.

Justice Isa's appointment as the BHC Chief Justice came following then CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry dismissing all judges who swore allegiance to dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO).

First environmental pollution case

The bench also heard its first environmental pollution case, marking a significant step in addressing the growing pollution crisis.

Justice Mazhar stressed that the court would closely scrutinize all environmental issues, while Justice Hilali voiced concerns about unchecked development and the spread of housing societies, which contribute to pollution.

Justice Mandokhail reiterated that pollution was a nationwide issue, citing vehicle emissions as a major source of pollution. Questioning the effectiveness of the efforts to control such emissions, he requested environmental impact reports from all provinces.

The bench also acknowledged that despite Islamabad’s environmental agency claiming satisfactory conditions, on-the-ground pollution and unchecked industrial activities painted a different picture.

Justice Afghan raised concerns about agricultural land being converted for housing projects like DHA and expanding urban zones, which has led to widespread pollution and urban sprawl.

He emphasized the importance of sustainable development, proposing the construction of high-rise buildings in non-seismic zones as a way to optimize urban space. Additionally, he advocated for a shift toward a more practical flat culture, encouraging the use of compact living spaces instead of sprawling housing plots, which would help address urbanization challenges while preserving valuable land resources.

The bench directed the additional attorney general to provide a detailed environmental report within three weeks and requested provincial collaboration for effective solutions.

With the case having been ongoing since 1993, Justice Mazhar raised concerns over the lack of a chairman for the Environmental Change Authority, highlighting that the absence of leadership was hindering the authority's ability to function effectively.

Emphasizing the need for decisive leadership, he stressed that the authority's work could not progress without proper governance.

The court then set a date for the next hearing, where a detailed review of provincial environmental impact reports will take place, to expedite the resolution of the case.

Ban on marriage with foreign nationals

The bench held a hearing on a petition that sought to impose a ban on marriages between members of parliament and foreign nationals, ultimately dismissing the petition and imposing a PKR 20,000 ($70) fine on the petitioner.

During the proceedings, Justice Mazhar questioned the legal grounds for such a ban, asking, “Under what law can restrictions on marriages be imposed?”

He clarified that the matter was a legislative issue, falling outside the court's jurisdiction, and emphasized that any changes regarding such marriages should be addressed through the appropriate legislative channels, not through judicial intervention.

Petition to reschedule general elections

The constitutional bench also rejected a request to amend the general elections schedule, upholding the objections raised by the Registrar’s Office.

The elections in Pakistan, held on Feb. 8, proceeded as scheduled, despite a petition seeking to delay them until May.

Justice Mandokhail suggested the petition deserved a double penalty due to its frivolous nature.

.