As the events on May 9 remain the bones of the battle between Pakistan Tehreek-E-Insaf (PTI) and executive authorities, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) seems Yahya Afridi determined to tighten a tightening and maintain a balance between both sides.

A three-judge bench led by CJP Afridi is currently hearing government petitions seeking cancellation of bail assigned to PTI activists who are allegedly involved in the May 9 events.

Instead of continuing directly with profits, CJP Afridi has offered the special prosecutor an alternative: consulting relevant quarters on whether the court should dispose of bail questions by fixing a three-month timeline for court court to complete the case against the defendants.

He also suggested that the defendants should be referred to participate in the investigation within the next seven days.

Especially accusing Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi requested a day to consult the proposal. The hearing resumes Tuesday (today).

For many legal experts, however, the real test is ahead. They believe that the judiciary should go the extra kilometer to ensure justice and proper process in litigation in connection with the May 9 events.

According to them, courts have so far dropped the ball when it comes to maintaining proper process for PTI leaders and workers.

Senior politician Chaudhry Fawad Hussain-self an accused in May 9-related cases-expressed surprise that PTI-prosecuted persons had chosen to stay away from Supreme Court cases, without any lawyer present to offer an exact account to the judges.

“The reality is that cases of May 9 represent an obvious abuse of the courts to undermine the rule of law. The judges have been harassed, yet SCP under Qazi Faez Isa and later under the current CJP has not even bothered to tackle their complaints,” Fawad said.

He further noted that courts against terrorism have completely collapsed after SC’s rejection of maintaining the judges’ rights. “Now judges with questionable reputation are appointed, and they are aggressively pushing these cases forward without a proper process.”

“I am one of the defendants. In Faisalabad, 23 witnesses have been registered in the case against me, but still I have not received a formal prosecutor or investigative (io) statement that led to my nomination,” he complained.

“The situation is similar in Rawalpindi, where we remain unaware of the specific offenses that we are alleged to have committed, since neither a specific charging sheet nor a copy of the statement has been given.”

Fawad also pointed out that SC’s Directive of concluding litigation within three months only suggests a push for military court court court conviction.

A debate is now winning traction over whether CJP Afridi will succeed in keeping the balance between PTI and state institutions. He is known for prioritizing arbitration and reconciliation between parties during the assessment of the case.

After that 26th amendment, however, Chief Justice has been cut. Furthermore, CJP Afridi is not part of the constitutional bench.

While he still has the authority to interpret the law and the constitution, the executive occurs with his current approach, especially since he has not hindered the appointment of government -backed nominees to the overall judiciary.

Despite the fact that CJP showing intention to speed up the disposal of 9. May-related cases, PTI has already filed a petition seeking the formation of a judicial commission to examine the authenticity of the events that happened that day.

However, CJP Afridi maintained the court decision issued by the then Lahore High Court (LHC) Chief Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan, who had rejected the government’s application to transfer the ATC judge.

It has also been found that CJP Afridi is holding key meetings regarding the developing political situation in Balochistan. Supreme Court Bar Association President Mian Rauf Atta also met with him on the same question.