- “Judge who governs the desires of this configuration labeled” Pro-Pti “.”
- “Max no of current judges SC appointed during the mandate of ex-CJP Isa.”
- Reema Omer refutes the plot, the need for “purge” before the Superior Court.
Given that the country’s judicial power remains a key institution in the constitutional trichotomy of Pakistan powers, it faced various challenges and emerging disorders, including an apparent conspiracy to include Pro-Pakistani judges Tehreek-insaf (PTI) before the Supreme Court.
Caterently offset this presumption, the legal expert Reema Omer said that the government’s attempt to support the account that the current composition of the SC reflected a conspiracy of the former Head of Internal Services (ISI) in chief (RETD) Faiz Hamid And ex -chief justices Saqib Nisar, Asif Saeed Khosa, Gulzar Ahmed and Umar Ata Bandial – which requires a “purge” – was in fact a “full manufacture”.
By developing the reasoning behind its evaluation in a series of messages on X, Omer continues in depth on the current judges of SC, their named, the apparent inclinations and how they are perceived by various stakeholders.
Of the 17 judges SC, supports the expert, three were appointed by ex-CJP Nisar, including the Munib Akhtar judges, Mansoor Ali Shah and the current CJP Yahya Afridi.
She argues that the judge of the senior then judges Shah was loved by the current configuration and hated by the PTI until his reserved siege judgments – in which the complete bench of the Supreme Court led by Judge Shah held the former Party in power eligible for seats reserved by a majority of 8-5 verdict.
The resentment of the founding party of Imran Khan, she supports, was based on the role of the senior judge in the judgments linked to the Qazi Faez Isa reference and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab elections.
Meanwhile, the current CJP Afridi, adds Omer, is in fact faithful to the government led by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to appoint it as the highest judge in the country.
Continuing, three other judges – appointed by the ex -CJP Gulzar – are judges Ayesha Malik, Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Jamal Khan Mandokhail.
Mandokhail judge being “considered very favorable by this government”, Omer says that judge Mazhar is too much one of the “favorite judges” who confirmed the electoral commission for the decision of Pakistan to deprive the PTI of his electoral symbol of Bat and other verdicts against the former ruling party.
Four other judges, although appointed by the former CJP bandial, also have no apparent inclination towards the PTI. These include Judge Athar Minallah who has not only become the most vocal critic in Bandial, but he himself was subjected to campaigns against him led by the PTI.
Likewise, the current government considers the favorably hilali Musarrat judge. On the other hand, the judges Shahid Waheed and Hasan Azhar Rizvi were nominated by the Muslim League Pakistani-Nawaz (PML-N) led the Minister of Law of Pakistan Democratic Moven (PDM), the attorney general of the time, voted for them.
In addition, the maximum number of current judges of SC, supports Omer, was in fact appointed during the mandate of ex-CJP Isa such as judges Irfan Saadat, Naeem Akhter Afghan, Shahzad Ahmed Khan, Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Shahid Bilal Hassan.
However, she thinks that the current leaders were not satisfied with the Abbasi judge and the judge Saadat and put them aside.
“Are they also part of the Gen (Retd) plan to capture SC?” She questions.
In addition, censoring the coalition government to arm the distinct question of the elevation of subordinate judges to SC in order to argue that it was also a conspiracy to fill the SC with pro-PTI judges, The legal expert affirms that the judge Amin -Ud- din Khan – who also directs the constitutional bench of the SC – was fifth of the high court of Lahore in seniority when he was brought up as judge of the Supreme Court by the former CJP Khosa.
“Obviously, any judge who governs the desires of this configuration is labeled” Pro-Pti “and a member of” Faiz Group “.
“And this myth of” conspiracy “is nothing other than a tool to make indignation against the judiciary to give legitimacy to the attempted judicial capture of the government,” she concludes.