ISLAMABAD: Justice Salahuddin Panhwar recused himself from the Supreme Court’s constitutional bench hearing review petitions in the reserved seats case on Friday, following objections raised by SIC counsel senior advocate Hamid Khan, ARY News reported.
Justice Panhwar stated he wished to review his brief verdict before stepping down from the case.
The 11-judge bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, resumed the hearing when Justice Panhwar addressed the objection raised by Hamid Khan, counsel for the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC).
Khan had questioned the inclusion of judges appointed to the Supreme Court after the 26th Constitutional Amendment, alleging potential impartiality. Justice Panhwar noted that he was among the judges named in the objection.
Emphasizing the importance of public trust in the judiciary, Justice Panhwar remarked, “It is essential that no party has any objection to the bench.” Citing these concerns, he announced his decision to step down, stating, “It is because of these objections that I cannot sit on this bench.”
Read more: Election Act amendment cannot override July 12 ruling on reserved seats: SC
He also expressed personal disappointment, noting his long professional association with Hamid Khan since 2010, but clarified that his decision was not personal.
Hamid Khan welcomed Justice Panhwar’s recusal. However, Justice Aminuddin Khan, visibly annoyed, remarked that the matter was not one to be celebrated, as the bench was also hearing arguments from another SIC lawyer.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel criticized Khan’s conduct, stating, “This is all happening because of your conduct, though you did not deserve to be giving arguments in the case.” Khan maintained his right to present arguments.
Later, Hamid Khan raised another objection, arguing that a 10-judge bench lacked the authority to hear the case, as the original verdict was delivered by a 13-judge bench. He contended that a 12-member bench was required for the review.
The bench, however, rejected this objection, with Justice Mandokhel affirming that they would proceed to hear all 12 pleas in the case.
Reserved seats issue
The issue came to limelight after over 80 Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) backed independent candidates emerged victorious in the February 8 elections.
The SIC then approached the ECP on February 21 seeking allocation of reserved seats.
However, the PTI suffered a setback after the electoral body, citing the party’s failure to submit its list of candidates, denied allocating the reserved seats to the SIC via its 4-1 majority verdict on March 4.
The election commission distributed the reserved seats for women and minorities among other political parties.
The PTI-backed SIC had approached the court after the ECP refused to allocate the seats due to the party’s failure to submit its list of candidates before the deadline. The Peshawar High Court (PHC) upheld the ECP’s decision, leading the SIC to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court initially ruled on July 12 that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was eligible for reserved seats, contradicting the Election Commission’s March 1 decision.
The ruling was reaffirmed in a detailed judgment released last month.
Clarification
On 18 October, Supreme Court in another clarification reiterated that amendments to the Election Act cannot nullify its July 12 ruling on the reserved seats case.
“ECP is bound to implement Supreme Court decisions,” stated the judges in today’s clarification.
