President Dr Arif Alvi on Friday approved the withdrawal of the curative review reference and Civil Miscellaneous Application (CMA) against Supreme Court Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
The president gave his approval on the advice of the prime minister in accordance with Article 48 of the Constitution.
Dr Alvi also signed his power of attorney in favor of Advocate Supreme Court Anees Ahmed Shehzad.
Earlier on Thursday, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif ordered to withdraw the curative review reference against Senior Supreme Court judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
The cabinet meeting, presided over by Shehbaz Sharif, decided not to pursue the reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
Taking to twitter, the premier wrote: “On my direction, the government has decided to withdraw the Curative Review Petition against senior most Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Qazi Faez Isa”.
The government later forwarded a summary for withdrawing the curative review reference against Justice Isa.
The Law Ministry sent the summary to the president.
The premier said Justice Isa and his family have been subjected to ‘harassment’ and ‘defamation’ in the guise of the reference.
He further added that the reference against the senior judge was not genuine, but rather a vengeful move by PTI Chairman Imran Khan against a “just judge”.
Terming the reference “false”, he said the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) condemned the action even when the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was in power. PM Shehbaz went on to assert that the former prime minister had abused his constitutional authority, adding that, “President Dr. Arif Alvi had played a significant role to facilitate this attack on judiciary”.
The legal community, including the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), also opposed this reference; he added.
In 2021, the PTI-led government filed a curative review petition challenging the majority order of the review petitions of Justice Qazi Faez issued on April 26 of the same year.
But the petition was returned by the Supreme Court’s registrar who raised objections, stating that the petition is suffering from ‘deficiencies and containing scandalous language, and hence unmaintainable’.
