ISLAMABAD – Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Nasirul Mulk has directed all judges of the Supreme Court to reach Islamabad, as some of the judges were on summer vacations.
According to reports, the apex court is expected to hold a full court hearing on the prevailing political situation. The Supreme Court on Monday asked the protesting parties what role they want the apex court to play in the ongoing crisis. This was said by a larger bench during the hearing of a plea against extra-constitutional steps and sit-ins in the heart of Islamabad in presence of Pakistan Teherek-i-Insaf (PTI) lawyer Ahmad Awais.
The bench asked the counsel of both protesting parties to ask their party leadership what proposal they had for the apex court in the ongoing political crisis and to revert with a response within the house. The Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) lawyer was not present during the hearing. Justice Jawwad S Khwaja was visibly perturbed by the clashes, and asked the counsel, “What do you think. what is happening on Constitution Avenue, is this any different from any insurgency happening in FATA?”
Justice Saqib Nisar was also not happy with the unfolding events, and said that his car and security escort had come under attack the previous night. It was not clear in which part of the capital the incident took place in. The honourable judge said that security of Pakistan was in danger and questioned did any body give permission to the protestors to enter Pakistan Television?
He said that now the Supreme Court was not secure. The bench again asked the lawyers of the protesting parties what they wanted to achieve. “Whom do you trust?” Justice Nisar asked. “Your senior counsel Hamid Khan has suggested taking suo moto. What is in your mind? What kind of sou moto should be taken?” he asked. Hamid Khan was not present in the courtroom.
The lawyer for the PTI was mostly silent. On one occasion, he attempted to tell the bench that his party does not accept the parliament as a legitimate one as it has been elected through rigging, but the court dismissed this argument. “We don't want to go into that. Tell us what we should do,” the bench said.