ISLAMABAD: Encouraged by former president Pervez Musharraf’s review petition against the Supreme Court’s decision invalidating the Nov 2007 imposition of emergency, a number of judges affected by the SC decision are also weighing whether to follow suit.

According to sources, a number of those commonly described as ‘PCO judges’ were waiting for the review petition by Gen Musharraf and now are seriously pondering over filing similar petitions in the Supreme Court.

Musharraf’s lawyer Mohammad Ibrahim Satti filed the review petition on Monday, claiming that the emergency had been clamped on advice by then prime minister Shaukat Aziz that the security of the country had been imperilled by some actions of then chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and some other members of the superior judiciary.

But the registrar’s office returned it on Tuesday, citing reasons that the petition was scandalous for using intemperate language against judges and that Gen Musharraf’s plea was for a second review that was not possible to entertain.

The first review was sought Anwar Bhinder, one of the aggrieved parties, and rejected by the court.

“We will file a chamber appeal by Friday against the decision of the registrar’ office,” Advocate Satti told Dawn, adding that it was the first review petition on behalf of the former army chief who was the main affected party and had been condemned unheard in the 2009 verdict.

The chamber hearings are usually taken up by a judge nominated by the chief justice and in case the judge upholds the decision of the registrar’s office, a second appeal before a three-judge bench in the open court is permissible.

“We have incorporated our entire defence in the review petition and we will take a stand before the three-judge special court conducting trial of Musharraf under treason charges that our appeal is pending before the apex court,” Advocate Satti said.

About the allegation of using scandalous language, he said the defence argument before the court would be that the former chief justice and some judges harboured a grudge against Gen Musharraf and therefore were biased.

“We know the outcome of the appeals and the review petition but still we will take a chance,” he said.

The sources recalled that over 100 superior court judges had to leave their offices as a result of the verdict and many of them had also to withdraw their subsequent appeals against the Supreme Court’s contempt notices for taking oath under the provisional constitution order (PCO).

But contrary to Gen Musharraf, who had challenged the verdict only to the extent of the observations made against him, the former judges would also a seek review of portions of the ruling carrying adverse remarks against them, sources said.

A 14-judge bench of the apex court, headed by then chief justice Chaudhry, while dealing with the issue of taking oath under the PCO had held that the PCO judges had shut their eyes when it was obvious that they were not judges under the constitution and therefore they were intruders because they attempted to perform the duties of an office without authority of law and without public acquiescence.