Suo Motu Powers Lie With The SC, Not Just The CJP; Justice Qazi Faez Isa

On April 19, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the senior puisne judge of the Supreme Court, spoke during a celebration honouring the 1973 Constitution's 50th anniversary.

The Constitution grants the Supreme Court (SC) as a whole the authority to take suo motu notice, according to Justice Qazi Faez Isa, the senior puisne judge of the SC, who further noted that this authority does not exclusively rest with the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP).

He said this while addressing a ceremony honouring the Constitution's golden anniversary. Justice Isa, who will take over as CJP in September, was questioned about the conflicting views on the top judge's suo motu authority during the occasion.

It should be noted that on March 29, Justice Isa and Justice Aminuddin Khan issued a ruling stating that the CJP lacked the authority to create special benches or choose its members. They also ordered that all hearings based on suo motu notices and cases with significant constitutional implications be postponed until they were addressed by legislation. The order was eventually recalled, though, by a larger bench of six judges earlier this month.

In accordance with Justice Isa, "the SC in Article 184(3) means that all judges and the chief justice must unanimously take suo motu notice."

"In my view, since Article 184(3) starts with the words "Supreme Court," you should refer to the court as the SC when it convenes. There is no mention of the Chief Justice or Senior Puisne Judge. I believe that only the SC has access to this privilege.

The SC's original jurisdiction is outlined in Article 184(3) of the Constitution, which also gives it the authority to assume jurisdiction over cases involving a subject of "public importance" pertaining to the "enforcement of any of the fundamental rights" of Pakistani citizens.

Justice Isa's comments come as the controversy over the CJP's suo motu powers has heated up recently. The Parliament has also approved a bill that would strip the CJP's office of its ability to take suo motu notice in an individual capacity.

However, a larger bench led by CJP Umar Ata Bandial has limited the application of the bill, which has not yet become law.

Justice Isa stated during today's proceedings that some of his colleagues believed that the CJP alone may exercise the prerogative to take suo motu notice. "This is not stated in the Constitution." If so, feel free to share the article with me.

He reiterated that there was no mention of it in the Constitution while discussing yet another "opinion," that the CJP was the "master of the roster." According to the senior judge, the Latin phrase "suo motu" is not even included in the Constitution.

According to him, a suo motu notice might be issued under Article 184(3) in cases when "certain requirements" were met, such as when a subject was of public significance or where the enforcement of basic rights was necessary.

According to him, Article 184(3) was intended for individuals who were unfairly treated, such as "brick kiln workers, bonded labourers, women who were being deprived of education, and forced child labourers," because they lacked access to legal counsel.

He stated that the provision was created to safeguard these people and mentioned how Pakistan has "abundantly" used it.

Justice Isa elaborated on the instances in which Article 184(3) should be utilized, stating that it could not be used to benefit a particular person and should be used instead in situations affecting society as a whole and including fundamental rights.

"Where these two things are not applicable simultaneously, this article cannot be used," he continued.

The senior supreme justice added that this was the only instance in which it was not possible to challenge the court's decision. "One should be very vigilant in all of their actions when this article is brought into use," the rule reads.