ISLAMABAD: Pakistan's Supreme Court in a unanimous verdict on Friday struck down as null and void a recently enacted law modifying the review process of its judgements, dampening former premier Nawaz Sharif's hopes as he seeks to challenge his lifetime disqualification from holding any public office.
A three-member bench of the apex court led by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar ruled that the Supreme Court (Review of Judgments and Orders) Act 2023 was "unconstitutional".
The law enacted by the Pakistan government in May was "aimed at facilitating and strengthening the Supreme Court in exercising its powers to review its judgements and orders".
It enlarged the review powers of the apex court against its own judgments and orders issued under the suo motu jurisdiction.
It was said that former premier Nawaz Sharif, 73, could be a beneficiary as he was disqualified under this jurisdiction.
Nawaz Sharif, the elder brother of outgoing Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, was disqualified in 2017 by a five-member bench of the apex court but he couldn't file an appeal as there was no law to challenge the judgment of the top judiciary.
In 2018, he became ineligible to hold public office for life after a Supreme Court verdict.
The former premier has been living in London since November 2019 for medical treatment after a Pakistani court allowed him a four-week reprieve.
Nawaz Sharif, who has served as the prime minister of Pakistan for three non-consecutive terms, was serving a seven-year sentence in the Kot Lakhpat Jail in Lahore in the Al-Azizia corruption case before he left for London.
Shehbaz Sharif has already said Nawaz Sharif will be Pakistan's prime minister again if their party wins the general election later this year.
The court in its detailed verdict on Friday stated that the law was "repugnant to and ultra vires the Constitution" while being beyond the legislative competence of Parliament.
"It is accordingly struck down as null and void and of no legal effect," the order said.
The court said the law was an effort to interfere in the scope of the SC's powers and jurisdiction ordinary legislation which could only be done through an amendment in the constitution.
It stated that law instead of enlarging the review jurisdiction created a new appellate jurisdiction that has no constitutional basis, impacting the independence of the judiciary, and any such law would by its nature and from its very inception, be "unconstitutional, null, void and of no legal effect".
Meanwhile, Justice Akhtar wrote an additional note, rejecting the notion that the review was like an appeal.
"A review is not an appeal. Indeed, it is quite different and distinct from it. So says conventional wisdom," he said.
The law was introduced when tension between the executive and judiciary was running high due to differences over the holding of elections in the Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa provinces.
As Chief Justice Bandial was taking action through suo motu actions, the government hurriedly passed a law to dilute his discretionary powers to take suo motu actions and also constitute panels of judges to proceed on such matters.
The law also enlarged the review against the decisions by the court under its suo motu jurisdiction and allowed all affectees of such decisions to file appeals.
Reacting to the court striking down the law, former law minister Azam Nazeer Tarar told Geo News the verdict was unfortunate.
"It is not a good tradition if courts will repeatedly interfere in Parliament's workings and give verdicts that impair its independence," he said.
When asked about the fate of Nawaz Sharif after the law was declared null and void, he said that the verdict would have no impact on the cases of disqualification of the supreme leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) party.
Asked if the verdict could delay Nawaz Sharif's expected return to the country from London, Tarar said, "Not at all."