Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-i-Ayeen-i-Pakistan leader Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar on Thursday moved the Supreme Court (SC), seeking its intervention to pave the way for the fixation of pending petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment before the full court.

The 26th Constitutional Amendment, also known as the Constitutional Package, is legislation that takes away the SC’s suo motu powers, sets the CJP’s term at three years and empowers a special par­liamentary committee to nominate the next CJP from among the three most senior SC judges.

Last month, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi had ignored a decision made last year by a committee, constituted under the Practice and Procedure Act 2023, to bring challenges to the 26th Amendment of the Constitution before the full SC.

After filing his petition today, Khokhar said while speaking to the media that he sought the CJP’s decision to be overturned.

“The chief justice said, ‘I have informally consulted all Supreme Court justices. We have concluded that all judges of the Supreme Court do not hear this case’”, Khokhar said.

“When one committee administratively gives its decision according to the law, you cannot ignore it,” the former senator emphasised. “In our petition, we have put forward this exact stance — that the committee’s decision stands on its own merit and CJP Afridi’s informal consultations have no legal basis.”

According to a copy of the petition available with Dawn.com, Khokhar pleaded that the apex court “declare that the decision of the committee constituted under Section 2 of the Practice and Procedure Act, directing fixation of the pending petitions before the Full Court is binding and shall be implemented forthwith.”

He requested that the law secretary and other authorities related to the matter be directed to immediately fix the pending petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment before the Full Court in compliance with the committee’s decision date.

Additionally, he pleaded that the apex court declare that “any administrative act or explanation negating or obstructing the implementation of the committee’s order is without lawful authority and of no legal effect”.

He lastly requested the court to pass any other order deemed “just and proper” in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and to uphold the Constitution.

The petition argued that under Section 2(2) of the Practice and Procedure Act, the committee, by majority decision dated October 31, 2024, directed the registrar’s office to fix the petitions before the Full Court.

“The said direction remains lawful, valid, and binding. Neither the registrar nor any other administrative authority has the competence to disregard or override a lawful order of the committee,” it stated.

Khokhar contended that ignoring the committee’s decision was akin to administrative impropriety and damaged the apex court as an institution.

“The refusal to implement the committee’s lawful order deprives the petitioners and other stakeholders of their constitutional right to a fair hearing and timely adjudication of challenges involving the basic structure of the Constitution, thereby offending Articles 4, 10A, and 25 of the Constitution,” the petition added.

Since October 2024, petitions have been filed with the SC challenging the amendment, contending that it “abrogates, repeals, alters and destroys the basic features of the Constitution” and “violates” fundamental rights.