sued on Oct 18 by eight judges when the CJP was in the midst of writing a judgement. “Therefore, I sent for the file but did not find the original of the said ‘clarification’ therein,” the note regretted.
It went on to say that the assistant registrar (implementation) issued a letter to the secretary of the Election Commission of Pakistan and the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) even though the original of the second clarification was not in the file. The officials were subsequently directed to submit their explanation suggesting why the said letter/notice was issued before it was filed in the office, the note said.
Likewise, the webmaster, Asim Javed, was also directed to explain why the second clarification was uploaded on the Supreme Court website on Oct 18 when the same had not been filed in the office.
On Sept 22, CJP Isa raised nine questions in a letter to the Supreme Court’s registrar, seeking clarification on how an earlier Sept 14 clarification order was uploaded on the top court’s website.
The Sept 14 order, issued by the eight judges led by senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, had criticised the ECP for failing to implement the Supreme Court’s July 12 judgement, which declared the PTI eligible for reserved seats in parliament.
In his letter dated Sept 21, the CJP wondered who had directed the uploading of the Sept 14 clarification order on the court’s website.
His inquiry followed a note from the deputy registrar (Judicial), who flagged the issue of the order’s appearance on the website. The note questioned how the order was uploaded when no cause list had been issued, no notices had been sent to the parties, and the order had not been received by the deputy registrar’s office until 8pm on the day of its upload.
CJP Isa’s letter to the registrar echoed the concerns raised in the deputy registrar’s note, stating that nine questions had arisen as a result of the development.
Among the questions posed were: when were the applications for clarification filed, and why were they not presented before the three-judge committee established under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023. He also inquired about how the applications were fixed for hearing without a cause list being issued and whether notices were served to the parties concerned, including the attorney general for Pakistan.
The CJP had also questioned in which courtroom or chamber the applications were heard and by whom and why no cause list was issued for the announcement of the Sept 14 clarification order.
He also asked how the order was uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website without first being deposited in the court’s original file. Lastly, the CJP demanded to know who had authorised the upload of the order.
