ECP lawyer says justice not being seen to be done

ISLAMABAD: The election commission’s lawyer Irfan Qadir in his contentions in the election delay case hearing said that partiality being attributed to the bench, ARY News reported.

A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, also comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, was hearing the election delay case.

“In case of objection over a judge, he used to recuse himself from the hearing bench,” ECP lawyer said. “Here is one party on a side, while all other political parties on other side,” he said. “The bench being termed as partial,” he said.

“All PDM parties have demanded a full court hearing in the past, the court has given its opinion over the full court,” Irfan Qadir said.

The ECP lawyer said that there is no lack of confidence over the court, but justice should be seen happening. “A decision of the court has already been in dispute, for the time justice not being seen to happen,” he said.

“In my view justice not being given, it might be a misconception,” he said.

He argued that the decision about the election date should be entrusted to the election commission. “The verdict was 3-2 or 4-3, should be discussed,” Irfan Qadir said.

“From nine judges four had dismissed petitions, two judges issued the order,” he said. “Court order on March 01 was a minority note, the court should take steps to resolve this dispute,” ECP lawyer said. “The ratio of judges in the verdict is not an internal matter of judges, all four judges who had dismissed petitions should also be included in the bench,” he argued.

“Judicial decision’s impact could not be subsided with a circular,” he further argued.

“The Chief Justice could not become judge on the circular issued by him,” he said.

“The people’s confidence over the judiciary is essential. The majority’s rights should prevail over fundamental rights of a group,” he said.

“Implementation of the constitution and the law is the national interest, election in 90 days in the constitution is another matter,” the lawyer argued.