The document in question is a Supreme Court of Pakistan judgment related to Constitutional Petitions

No. 9 of 2009 and No. 8 of 2009. The judgment was presided over by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad
Chaudhry along with a full bench of the Supreme Court. Here is a structured and detailed summary of
the case:

Parties Involved:

 Petitioners: Sindh High Court Bar Association and Nadeem Ahmed Advocate.

 Respondents: Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad,
and others.

Background:

 The petitions challenge the legality of the removal of judges from the Supreme Court and High
Courts on November 3, 2007, which the petitioners claim violated Article 209 of the Constitution
and the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of Syed Zafar Ali Shah.

 The petitioners also contest the validation of this removal by a smaller bench in the case of Tika
Iqbal Khan, arguing that it was per incuriam and not by a de jure Supreme Court.

Legal Issues:

 Validity of Judges' Removal: The core issue is whether the removal of judges on November 3,
2007, was constitutional.

 Legitimacy of Subsequent Validation: Whether the subsequent validation of the removal by a

smaller bench of the Supreme Court was legally sound.

 Validity of Ordinances: The judgment addresses the presumption of validity of certain

ordinances without the approval of Parliament or Provincial Assemblies, as required by Articles
89 and 128 of the Constitution.

 Increase in Number of Supreme Court Judges: The increase in the number of judges through the
Finance Act of 2008, passed only by the National Assembly, is scrutinized against Article 176 of
the Constitution.

Judgment Summary:

 The court determined that the removal of judges was indeed violative of the Constitution and
the established case law.

 It was held that the validation of this removal by a smaller bench was per incuriam and not by a
legitimate Supreme Court.

 The court ruled that the ordinances in question were not valid laws as they did not receive the
necessary approval from the legislative bodies.

 The increase in the number of Supreme Court judges through the Finance Act of 2008 was
deemed valid only for financial purposes and not for the purposes of determining the number of
judges as per the Constitution.
Implications:

 The judgment does not affect the general elections held or the government formed thereafter,
including the President, Prime Minister, Parliament, and Provincial Governments.

 The court emphasized its role in upholding the Constitution and the principles of democracy,
freedom, equality, tolerance, and social justice as enunciated by Islam, as well as securing the
independence of the judiciary.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court of Pakistan, in this judgment, upheld the constitutional mandate regarding the
independence of the judiciary and the democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution. It invalidated
the actions taken against the judiciary on November 3, 2007, and clarified the legal status of certain
legislative instruments and the number of Supreme Court judges.