Supreme Court Issues Written Verdict on Article 63A Review Case

The Supreme Court has issued its detailed written decision on the Article 63A review case, authored by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. The 23-page judgment sheds light on the procedural aspects of the presidential reference submitted by President Arif Alvi, which lacked approval or advice from the Cabinet or the Prime Minister.

The court noted that during a constitutional petition hearing, former Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan informed the court about plans to bring the reference regarding Article 63A. A bench led by former Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Muneeb Akhtar had ordered the consolidation of the reference and the petition.

The judgment raised concerns over the timing of the President’s involvement, which coincided with political turmoil linked to the no-confidence motion against the then-Prime Minister. It also noted that Justice Muneeb Akhtar, while available for regular cases, was not included in the review bench.

The case, which was finally scheduled for a review hearing after 27 months, was delayed throughout the tenure of Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial. The court dismissed any claims of rushing the process, calling them unfounded.

Islamabad: The Supreme Court has issued its detailed written decision on the Article 63A review case, authored by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. The 23-page judgment sheds light on the procedural aspects of the presidential reference submitted by President Arif Alvi, which lacked approval or advice from the Cabinet or the Prime Minister.

The court noted that during a constitutional petition hearing, former Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan informed the court about plans to bring the reference regarding Article 63A. A bench led by former Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Muneeb Akhtar had ordered the consolidation of the reference and the petition.

The judgment raised concerns over the timing of the President’s involvement, which coincided with political turmoil linked to the no-confidence motion against the then-Prime Minister. It also noted that Justice Muneeb Akhtar, while available for regular cases, was not included in the review bench.

The case, which was finally scheduled for a review hearing after 27 months, was delayed throughout the tenure of Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial. The court dismissed any claims of rushing the process, calling them unfounded.