In the issue of the reserved seats review, SIC submits three different petitions.
In the dispute involving the reserved seats, the Supreme Court has received three different petitions, one of which is an opposition to the bench.
The applications were filed by the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC). Among these are requests for a live broadcast of the proceedings and to object to the bench.
Furthermore, it has been requested that the 26th Constitutional Amendment issue be decided prior to the matter involving reserved seats.
The petition asserts that it is a well-established rule that the bench that rendered the first decision should consider a review petition. It further stated that a new bench cannot be created for a review even though judges are available.
See also: SC postpones review petition hearing in case involving reserved seats till May 19.
The petition alleges that the Supreme Court’s regulations were broken in the formation of the bench considering the issue involving reserved seats. The distinction between review and appeal has been muddled by the appointment of a new bench, and the dismissal of two judges from the bench raises additional concerns.
“How can 11 judges hear a review of a 13-member bench’s decision?” the petition goes on to ask. The 26th provision created the constitutional bench, and litigation challenging that provision are still pending. As a result, the review hearing ought to be delayed until the 26th Amendment’s constitutionality is established.
The petition asks that the original bench be recreated for the case review of the reserved seats and that the court proceedings be streamed live.
