ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Monday rejected on Monday a set of intra-court appeals, including one filed by five Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges in a judges transfer case, for non-prosecution.
The case pertains to the transfer of three judges from other high courts to the federal capital, and the IHC judges had challenged a decision by the now-defunct Constitutional Bench (CB) of the Supreme Court to uphold the transfers.
However, the appeal was fixed before the FCC following its establishment under the 27th Amendment.
A six-member FCC bench, headed by Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justices Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Ali Baqar Najafi, Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Rozi Khan Barrech and Arshad Hussain Shah, took up nine appeals pertaining to the case today.
As the proceedings began, the court associate called out the names of each of the lawyers representing different clients, and when they did not appear, the FCC dismissed six of those appeals one at a time, dictating separate orders for each plea.
The rejected appeals included the one filed by IHC Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Saman Rafat Imtiaz and Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri. These judges were also not present at the hearing.
Apart from the appeal moved by the five judges through senior counsel Muneer A. Malik, the FCC also took up pleas filed by Tahir Faraz Abbasi through Advocate Abid Shahid Zuberi, Raja Muqsit Nawaz Khan and PTI founder Imran Khan through counsel Idrees Ashraf, the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) and Lahore Bar Association (LBA) through counsel Hamid Khan, and the Karachi Bar Association, Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen and Riasat Ali Azad through counsel Faisal Siddiqi.
From these nine appeals, the FCC adjourned the hearing on three pleas for an indefinite period.
Among them was also Imran’s plea, whose counsel Ashraf sought directives for meeting the incarcerated former prime minister. He argued that he needed instructions from Imran after the enactment of the 27th Amendment.
The counsel pleaded that he had to file additional grounds since he had moved the appeal against the SC’s short order. Therefore, he argued, a meeting with the client was necessary.
However, Justice Aminuddin rejected the request, observing that the counsel should approach the forum that sentenced his client. Justice Aminuddin said the matter did not fall in the FCC’s domain.
But, the counsel argued that a directive by the FCC would “fulfil the requirement of complete justice” under Article 187 of the Constitution.
During the hearing, Advocate Ajmal Toor appeared before the court on behalf of senior counsel Hamid Khan, who is representing the LHCBA and LBA.
Advocate Toor sought more time from the court as Hamid was unavailable.
The court then also adjourned the hearing on the pleas of the two lawyers’ bodies for an indefinite period.
