Tag: Supreme Court

  • Real estate in Pakistan is ‘parking lot’ for untaxed money with support of DHAs and Army, says former FBR chairman

    Real estate in Pakistan is ‘parking lot’ for untaxed money with support of DHAs and Army, says former FBR chairman

    Shabbar Zaidi, the former Chairman of the Federal Board of Revenue in Pakistan, stated that only 300 companies out of the entire business sector in the country pay 70 per cent of the total taxes collected.

    According to Dawn, Zaidi dismissed the claims of some businesses that there were too many taxes in Pakistan and no dividends. He pointed out that the real estate was the “parking lot” of untaxed money, and that with the support of the DHAs and army, a system had been developed to officially launder money through real estate, which had perpetual amnesty in the country.

    He called for removing DHAs from the real estate business as there could not be fair competition between a state institution and private businesses in real estate, and also suggested that plots of land should be confiscated if construction was not done on them.

    Kashif Anwar, the president of the Lahore Chamber of Commerce and Industry, argued in favor of amnesty on undeclared foreign reserves to bring money back to the country.

    In another session, Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, the former Chief Justice of Pakistan, acknowledged that criticism of the Supreme Court for messing up big corporate cases was justified as the judges were not expert at finance and economics.

    Jillani suggested the formation of commercial benches in the SC and high court for such cases. In a session on local governments, Ammar Ali Jan, the general secretary of Haqooq-i-Khalq Party, criticized the absence of local government in the country, citing examples of polluted water and waste management issues.

  • Cannot air anything related to the conduct of serving judges, says PEMRA

    Cannot air anything related to the conduct of serving judges, says PEMRA

    Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) has prohibited electronic media to broadcast anything which is related to the conduct of serving judges of High Courts and Supreme Court (SC).

    In a notification, issued on Thursday, PEMRA said that it has been observed that despite repeated directives, satellite TV channels are “persistently discussing the conduct of honourable judges of superior courts and orchestrating vilification campaign through airing slanderous allegations.”

    It also added that the broadcast of such a thing is a clear violation of the PEMRA Ordinance, hence they have issued the orders.

    PEMRA has also warned that if the orders are not implemented, the license of the respective TV channel will be suspended.

    The development has taken place when the credibility of judges is being discussed after alleged audio leaks of a Supreme Court judge came to light.

    In the audio conversation that was leaked online last month, allegedly featured former Chief Minister (CM) Punjab Pervaiz Elahi talking to and about a sitting SC judge.

    Later, in a YouTube show “Talk Shock”, veteran journalists Azaz Syed and Umar Cheema claimed that more audio leaks related to judges might surface soon.

  • PTI’s Jail Bharo Tehreek ends; election campaign begins from March 4

    PTI’s Jail Bharo Tehreek ends; election campaign begins from March 4

    After Supreme Court (SC) passed its verdict in the suo Moto case of election dates in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan on Wednesday announced that his party would end its “Jail Bharo Tehreek (voluntary arrest movement)” and launch its election campaign on March 4 (Saturday).

    About the top court’s decision that elections will be held within 90 days, Khan praised the judiciary and said the nation stood with the court.

    However, he expressed fears that elections may not be held in 90 days, claiming that Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar tried to divide the judiciary.

    Slamming the federal minister’s views on the verdict, the PTI chief said: “His views on the Supreme Court verdict are shameful.”

    Khan added that since his government’s removal in April 2022, his party has won 30 by-polls out of 37.

    It is pertinent to mention that the elections in both provinces have been the core demand of PTI and the apex court’s verdict has been welcomed by the former ruling party.

  • PTI welcomes supreme court’s verdict while govt says it doesn’t require review

    PTI welcomes supreme court’s verdict while govt says it doesn’t require review

    Political parties from across the spectrum are reacting to Supreme Court’s (SC) verdict in the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) elections suo moto case.

    Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Fawad Chaudhry welcomed the verdict, saying, “It’s a victory for the Constitution”.

    The Supreme Court, the PTI leader added, has bound the federation to provide all sorts of support with security and provision of funds for carrying out polls.

    When asked whether elections will happen on April 9, as earlier suggested by President Arif Alvi, he responded by saying that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) proposed in court that the commission can make the elections possible on April 25.

    He also said that if the government doesn’t agree to the SC’s verdict, the top court will send the government home under Article 187.

    He also added that all five judges endorsed the principle of the election within 90 days. During a media talk, the PTI leader stressed that “Election is the foundation of the state.”

    On the other hand, Awami Muslim League Chief Sheikh Rashid congratulated the nation on the verdict and asked the country to “prepare for the elections”.

    He hoped that PTI is going to form governments in KP and Punjab

    From the government side, Federal Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said that there is no need to review the decision of the Supreme Court’s verdict, nor is it a matter that requires interpretation.

    He said that petitions are still being heard in High Courts, and the interpretation of the decision can also be seen there.

    He also stressed that the verdict is quite clear. However, the law minister took a jibe at President Alvi, saying that he breached the constitution by giving a date for the elections in both provinces.

    Earlier today (Wednesday), the top court directed all relevant authorities to hold elections within 90 days.

    The decision was passed three-two in favour of the verdict by the five-member bench, with Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail giving dissenting notes.

  • Supreme Court orders to hold polls within 90 days both in Punjab and KP

    Supreme Court orders to hold polls within 90 days both in Punjab and KP

    The Supreme Court of Pakistan has on Wednesday directed all relevant authorities to hold elections in Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP) within 90 days.

    The decision was passed three-two in favour of the verdict by the five-member bench, with Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail giving dissenting notes.

    Reading out the verdict reserved on Tuesday evening, Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) should suggest a date for polls to President Arif Alvi.

    “Elections must be held within 90 days of the dissolution of the assembly,” the verdict says, emphasizing that it was the constitutional responsibility of the Governor to announce an election date.

    “Parliamentary democracy is a salient feature of the Constitution. There can be no parliamentary democracy without Parliament or the provincial assemblies. And there can be neither Parliament nor provincial assemblies without the holding of general elections as envisaged, required and mandated by and under the Constitution and in accordance therewith,” the top court remarked.

    The court order stated, “In situations where the assembly is not dissolved by order of the governor, the constitutional responsibility of appointing a date for the general election that must follow is to be discharged by the president.”

    “The Election Commission must proactively be available to the president or the governor, and be prepared for such consultation as required for a date for the holding of general elections,” the order said.

    The court directed President Arif Alvi to announce the date of the Punjab election after consulting with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), and directed the KP governor to announce the date for polls in his province.

    It further said that in ordinary circumstances, the general election in Punjab ought to be held on April 9 — the date given by the president — but because there were delays in the announcement of the poll date, it might not be possible for the province to meet the 90-day deadline.

    “The Election Commission is therefore directed to use its utmost efforts to immediately propose, keeping in mind ss. 57 and 58 of the 2017 Act, date to the president that is compliant with the deadline. After consultation with the ECP, the President shall announce a date for holding the general election to the Punjab Assembly.”

    Meanwhile, the SC directed the KP governor to appoint a date for elections in the province after consulting the ECP.

  • Supreme Court to announce verdict tomorrow at 11am in elections suo motu case

    A five-member bench of the Supreme Court (SC) has reserved its verdict and said that it would announce the verdict in the elections suo motu case tomorrow (Wednesday) at 11am.

    The hearing of the case has been completed.

    Last Wednesday, the top court took suo motu notice of the delay in holding elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

    SC orders PTI and govt to consult on elections dates themselves and inform court

    Earlier, the apex court directed Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and the coalition government to sit together and decide on a date for elections in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab by 4pm today (Tuesday).

    In this regard, the top court directed Shireen Mazari and Fawad Chaudhry to consult with their party chairman, Imran Khan—who has been making appearances before various courts since Tuesday afternoon— and coalition partners’ lawyers to consult with their leaders and update the court.

    The instructions were issued after a five-member bench resumed hearing the apex court’s suo motu proceedings regarding the delay in the provincial polls.

    During the hearing on Tuesday, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial stated that none of the institutions, other than the court, had the authority to extend elections further than 90 days.

    The CJP also said that the court wanted to wrap up the proceedings today. “Our entire work is on halt because of this case,” he added and adjourned the hearing.

    The hearing has resumed again.

    Bench toot gaya: Five judges resume SC hearing after four recuse themselves from suo motu

    On February 27, SC resumed the hearing regarding election date suo motu notice.

    The bench, which previously included nine SC judges, has been reconstituted to a five-member bench after four judges disassociated themselves. Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Yahya Afridi recused themselves from hearing the case.

    A five-member bench has now started listening to the hearing of the case. Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial has said that the case has to be wrapped up by 9:30 tomorrow.

    At the previous hearing, the coalition parties — Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and Jamat-e-Ulema Islami-Fazl (JUI-F) — had presented a note in the apex court asking two SC judges, Justice Ahsan and Justice Naqvi, to recuse themselves from the case.

    CJP Bandial said that four members of the bench have disassociated themselves from the bench. “The remaining bench, however, will continue hearing the case.

    “We will continue the hearing for the interpretation of the Constitution because what the Constitution says depends on its interpretation,” he stated.

    CJP Bandial also pointed out that the note of one of Justice Mandokhail had emerged on social media even before the verdict was released. “We will take precautions so that such an incident does not recur in the future.”

    The CJP also addressed the issue of Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail’s objection note being leaked on social media, assuring that measures would be taken to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future.

    He remarked that whatever written in the Constitution was conditional on the interpretation of it, noting that the case was critical and warranted swiftness.

    Starting out his arguments, PTI’s counsel Barrister Ali Zafar said that the chief minister of Punjab sent a summary regarding dissolution of assembly to the governor.

    However, he said that the governor did not comply to it following which the assembly automatically dissolved after 48 hours.

    The counsel argued that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had requested the date of polls from the governor, who refused, citing that he was not the one who dissolved the assembly.

    Zafar said that President Arif Alvi summoned chief election commissioner for finalizing the date for polls however he did not show up.

    Following this, the lawyer said that the president unilaterally announced the dates for elections in both provinces.

    He emphasized that the Constitution clearly stipulated that elections could not exceed 90 days after the dissolution of the assembly.

    Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that there was a difference between automatic dissolution of assembly and that performed by the governor.

    Barrister Zafar commented that there was a need for someone to intervene in matters of public interest and therefore, the president announced the date.

    In response, Justice Mandokhail asked whether the president unilaterally announced the election date or if he was instructed by someone else.

    The counsel clarified that the president had provided details regarding the election date in his letter. Additionally, Zafar highlighted that the president had sent two letters to the election commission, with the first one dated February 8 requesting the announcement of the election date.

    He added that the main issue at hand was related to the announcement of the election date, which nobody seemed to be prepared for.

    The chief justice then asked if the ECP had responded to the president’s first letter, to which the counsel replied in the negative.

    During the hearing, PPP’s lawyer Farooq H Naek highlighted that they had filed a petition for the formation of a full court.

    The chief justice responded by stating that they would decide on the matter after hearing the counsel’s arguments.

    Barrister Zafar maintained that the elections could not be delayed for ten years. The court inquired about the progress in KP and asked if the governor could write a letter seeking consultation on the election date citing terrorism.

    The lawyer responded by stating that, according to him, the governor does not possess such authority.

    Justice Mazhar asked if the elections could be delayed due to terrorism, to which Justice Ali remarked that the decision on whether the polls would occur could only be taken when a date was fixed for the electoral exercise.

    Justice Mazhar then stated that the entire month was wasted on consultations.

    Justice Mandokhail inquired if the law and order situation could hamper the organization of the election, to which the CJP responded by reminding everyone that the assemblies in 2013 and 2018 completed their five-year terms.

    The DG Law added that the president could only fix the date for the polls once the assemblies completed their term.

    Justice Munib Akhtar remarked that the advice of the chief minister was implemented in KP but not in Punjab.

    The CJP stated that holding elections was the ECP’s job, while Barrister Zafar pointed out that Articles 218, 219, and 222 of the Constitution declared the election commission responsible for holding elections.

    Justice Mandokhail asked who was responsible for announcing the election date, to which Barrister Zafar said that the same question was before the court.

    He went on to say that the ECP gets the right to announce the date if Articles 218 and 219 were read jointly.

    The hearing was adjourned for a short break and set to resume at 4pm.

  • SC crisis continues as Justice Faez Isa refuses to hear cases, summons court registrar over changes in benches

    SC crisis continues as Justice Faez Isa refuses to hear cases, summons court registrar over changes in benches

    Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Yahya Afridi of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) have taken notice of the procedure for scheduling hearings in the apex court, summoning Registrar Ishrat Ali to appear before them.

    The court summoned the registrar to appear before the two Justices along with all records, stating that there is no “transparency” in his office.

    The development came after Justice Faez Isa, the second senior most judge in the court, found his bench changed in the morning from what it was yesterday. The future Chief Justice said that the cases whose files he had read yesterday had been changed while the judge who was with him on the bench had been changed too.

    “I am a judge of the Supreme Court, I have also been the Chief Justice of Balochistan High Court for five years. We want transparency, if the registrar transfers the case from one bench to another, how will there be transparency,” Justice Isa asked.

    Faez Isa also said that it seems that a registrar is more powerful than a judge like him. “I cannot hear the cases dated 2010 because the registrar appoints the cases for hearing. Can I call the registrar and ask that put up such-and-such case before the bench?”

    The honourable judge asked the registrar what is the policy of assigning cases. “On April 2, 2022, the court ordered the registrar to fix the procedure for fixing cases, there is no such thing as transparency in fixing cases in the registrar’s office.”

    Ishrat Ali said that cases are set for hearing only with the approval of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Justice Yahya Afridi then asked that Justice Hasan Rizvi was on ​​the bench, why did the bench change. “What is the procedure for fixing cases?”

    Former President of the Supreme Court Bar, Amanullah Kunrani said that people are tired of asking but our cases are not taken up.

    Justice Faez Isa asked the registrar that why was Justice Yahya Afridi and his bench changed? “Changing the bench without informing raises suspicions in the public mind,” said Isa.

    The Registrar said the Chief Justice’s staff officer verbally instructed that the roster must be changed. Justice Isa said he apologises that he cannot hear his cases today due to the sudden change of bench.

    He also said that a judge’s oath and code of conduct require equal treatment. “Article 10A is included in the fundamental rights, which says that there must be legal reasons for changing the bench.”

    “Arbitrary decision was made by making a bench of will, the dignity of the judiciary will be lower due to lack of transparency. Transparency requires that the case which was entered first should be heard first,” said Justice Isa.

  • PPP, PML-N, JUI-F request SC to constitute full bench minus judges Ijaz ul Ahsan, Mazhar Naqvi

    PPP, PML-N, JUI-F request SC to constitute full bench minus judges Ijaz ul Ahsan, Mazhar Naqvi

    Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and Jamat-e-Ulema Islami-Fazl (JUI-F) on Saturday requested the Supreme Court (SC) to constitute a full bench to hear the suo moto proceedings of election date for Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP).

    However, as per their request, the three parties have asked that Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan & Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi are excluded from the full bench.

    PDM asks Justice Ahsan, Justice Naqvi to recuse themselves from SC bench

    Earlier, the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition government has on Friday asked Supreme Court’s Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi to “recuse themselves” from a larger bench that is hearing suo motu

    The request was presented in a joint statement by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Jamat-e-Ulema Islami-Fazl (JUI-F), read by lawyer Farooq H Naek, on behalf of the three parties when the nine-member bench resumed the hearing of the suo motu notice today. 

    “All three political parties respectfully request that the two-member bench’s order of suo motu notice is available. Hence, both judges should not sit on the bench in the context of the provision of justice and fair trial,” Naek told the court.

    The PDM lawyer requested Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi to recuse themselves from the nine-member bench currently hearing the suo motu notice.

    Naek replied that he did not want to go into the details, adding that he also believed that the case should be heard by a full-court bench.

    At that, CJP Bandial said that the court will first discuss the admissibility of the request.

    Supreme Court raises questions on dissolution of Punjab and KP assemblies

    Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah of the Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday raised questions on the dissolution of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies.

    Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial said that the SC will not tolerate the violation of the Constitution as the top court began its suo motu hearing to determine who has the constitutional responsibility to announce the date for elections of a provincial assembly.

    At the outset of the hearing, the court observed that the authority for giving the date of the elections after the dissolution of the assembly needs clarification.

    It stated that the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assemblies were dissolved on January 14 and 17, respectively, and the elections have to be held in 90 days after the assembly dissolution under Article 224/2.

    The SC remarked that Punjab Governor Baligh ur Rehman says that he has not dissolved the provincial assembly on the chief minister’s advice.

    “It will be determined through the suo motu case that who has the authority to give the election date,” the court remarked.

    It said that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had also complained about not getting the funds for polling day.

    The Chief Justice observed that elaboration was needed on the issue of elections and assured all the parties that the court would listen to their arguments.

    “We have suspended our schedule for the next week so that we can hear this case,” CJP Bandial said.

    CJP Bandial said that the court will restrict itself to essential things, adding that the detailed hearing of the case will be held on Monday.

    CJP Bandial initiates suo motu action, constitutes nine-judge bench on Punjab, KP polls today

    A nine-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial will hear the suo motu notice of an apparent delay in the elections of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) assemblies today (Thursday).

    CJP Bandial on Wednesday evening initiated a suo motu proceeding to determine who has the constitutional responsibility and authority to announce the date for elections for a provincial assembly.

    The bench, headed by CJP Bandial, will consist of Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah. The case will be taken up on Thursday (today) at 2pm.

    According to the apex court’s statement, the bench will assess who is eligible to issue the date for polls, the constitutional responsibility of the federation and provinces and who will fulfil the constitutional responsibility of conducting elections and when.

    “It is the government’s responsibility to conduct elections in Punjab and KP according to the Constitution,” the top court’s statement read.

    The Supreme Court added that the two provincial assemblies were dissolved on January 14 and 18, respectively. 

    “Under Article 224 (2), polls should be held within 90 days of the assembly dissolution. The Constitution mandates that polls be held within 90 days.”

    The Supreme Court had taken suo motu notice on Wednesday two days after President Dr Arif Alvi fixed April 9 as polling day for the provincial assemblies.

     

  • More audio leaks of judges coming soon, claims journalists

    More audio leaks of judges coming soon, claims journalists

    Veteran journalists Azaz Syed and Umar Cheema have claimed on their YouTube show “Talk Shock” that more audio leaks which have the potential to plunge the country into further crisis, might surface soon.

    The two journalists discussed the recently leaked audio recordings which allegedly feature former Chief Minister (CM) Punjab Pervaiz Elahi talking about a sitting Supreme Court (SC) judge. The two journalists said that according to their well-informed sources, there are some audio leaks that may release soon.

    Syed said that some of the recordings are also related to former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar.

    However, both of them clarified that the information is not confirmed yet.

    Azaz added that judges’ phones are not being taped and highlighted that the recording of someone’s call is highly immoral and condemned the audio leaks.

    Moreover, they thoroughly discussed Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Senior Vice President Maryam Nawaz’s heavy criticism of the judiciary, claiming that government might know about the contents of the upcoming audio leaks.

  • Election date suo moto: Things you can’t miss in today’s Supreme Court hearing

    At the outset of Friday’s hearing, the Attorney-General told the court that the copy of the court order had not been received which is why all parties did not appear today.

    At this, CJP Bandial remarked that the purpose of today’s hearing was to inform the relevant authorities about the suo motu notice.

    The Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition government asked Supreme Court’s Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi to “recuse themselves” from the larger bench that is hearing suo motu proceedings regarding the delay in the announcement of a date for elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).

    The request was presented in a joint statement by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Jamat-e-Ulema Islami-Fazl (JUI-F), read by lawyer Farooq H Naek, on behalf of the three parties when the nine-member bench resumed the hearing of the suo motu notice today. 

    At this point, Naek appeared before the bench and read out a joint statement of the PPP, JUI-F and PML-N regarding their objections over the bench.

    The lawyer said that both judges had made their observations on the matter when they heard Ghulam Mahmood Dogar’s plea against his removal as the Lahore police chief.

    The counsel also shared the dissenting note of Justice Mandokhail.

    Naek stated that they were objecting to the two judges’ inclusion in the “interest of justice, fair play and to protect the fundamental right to a fair trial and due process as guaranteed under Article 10A”.

    At this, Justice Minallah asked the lawyer if he felt there was a need to form a full court for the case.

    “[The] matter of elections is of public [importance] so there should be [a] full court on this,” responded Naek and formally appealed for a full court to hear the suo motu notice on the delay in elections.

    Meanwhile, the counsel for Awami Muslim League (AML) chief Sheikh Rasheed said that the judiciary is being ridiculed on social media since yesterday and urged the court to look into this matter.

    At this, CJP Bandial said that this matter will be looked into later. “Prepare for the case,” the CJP told the attorney general.

    However, Naek interjected that the matter pertaining to the bench formation and the objections surrounding it should be resolved first.

    “The decision was made on February 16 and the notice was taken on February 22,” said the CJP, adding that taking suo motu notice falls under the chief justice’s jurisdiction. He said that the petitions by Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assembly speakers are clubbed with the suo motu.

    The court is also looking into the questions raised in the petitions filed by the speakers, he added.

    Justice Mandokhail said that political matters should be resolved in Parliament. “Tell your political parties why should the court hear these cases?” he added.

    Referring to a PML-N rally held on Friday, he said that “derogatory remarks” were hurled at the judiciary in that public gathering.

    Justice Mandokhail said that political matters must be settled in the Parliament. “Go to your parties … why should the court hear this matter?”

    At that, Naek said that he would seek direction from his party on the matter. He also requested the court to first hear the government’s objection on the bench.

    Justice Bandial said that in normal circumstances, citizens knocked on the door of the court. “But today, the Constitution of Pakistan has knocked on our doorstep.”

    Subsequently, the court observed that it will decide on Monday whether to form a full-court bench to hear the case.

    “The court will also hear the objection raised against the two judges on Monday,” CJP Bandial remarked.

    “Today the Constitution knocked on our doors which is why we took the suo motu notice,” remarked the CJP as he adjourned the hearing till 11:30am on Monday.