Before the Full Court

Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry's petition to the Supreme Court against the constitutionality of the Supreme Judicial Council to hear the presidential reference against him, will now be heard by a Full Court of the apex court from May 14 on day to day basis.
All the Justices minus those three who are members of the Council - Acting Chief Justice Rana Bhagwandas, Justice Javed Iqbal and Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar - and Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza, who had opted out of the larger bench, will be ab initio members of the Full Court.
On Monday, the larger bench had stayed proceedings in the Supreme Judicial Council and ordered that the CJP's petition be placed before the Full Court, a development which appears to have met the pleas of both the President that the matter should be heard by a Full Court and Justice Chaudhry's petition that the proceedings in the Supreme Council be stayed.
By referring the matter to a Full Court of the Supreme Court the larger bench has virtually lent a new dimension to the ongoing government-judiciary tussle, in that instead of streets the new arena for confrontation would be the court room. That should obviate the justification; if at all there was any, to raise public pressure on judiciary, so very often with the help of anti-government political forces.
That done, the ruling parties too should desist from mounting counter-rallies, including the "massive" show of strength that PML (Q) chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain has promised to put up in the capital on May 12. The Full Court proceedings, fully immunised against the street pressure, held in open would greatly help in creating public acceptance of the outcome.
Justice should not just be done; it should be seen to have been done. This is all the more necessary because whatever way the court decides its decision would have widespread ramifications with a bearing on the country's political scene.
A verdict by the apex court, the custodian of our constitution, given after transparent proceedings, would enhance the credibility of our judicial system. Meanwhile, efforts should be made to restore normalcy in the working of courts at all levels.
Because of the recurrent court boycotts and protest marches the ordinary justice seekers are in dire straits. Every day tens of thousands of them turn up in courts in connection with hearings of their cases. Most of them are poor people, who come from their far off villages to follow their cases, that very often are consigned to limbo for one or the other reason. Let these hapless people get the relief.