A tussle between the government and the bar
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government recently filed a complaint of misconduct against two judges — Justice Qazi Faez Isa of the Supreme Court and Justice K.K. Agha of the Sindh High Court — for allegedly hiding their assets and properties abroad. President Arif Alvi sent the reference to the Supreme Judicial Council, which adjudicates such matters. The reference was leaked to the media weeks before it was formally filed.
The legal fraternity is up in arms against the reference, which lawyers say was mala fide. Justice Isa is known for his integrity and is also set to be the Chief Justice in 2023 — the year of the next elections.
A senior lawyer associated with the PTI said, on condition of anonymity, that the reference is quite substantial. “There is a divided opinion on the interpretation of law in this regard. The government feels that Justice Isa should have declared the assets of his wife and children while some lawyers think that Article 209 doesn’t pertain to this in any case. This has to be settled by the court essentially. Let’s see how they interpret it.”
He added that accountability of judges is important. “Justice Isa’s financial integrity is not under question here. The issue is that he has not followed the law. Now, it will be probed who bought those properties and by whose money. It should be transparent in any case.”
Lawyer Saroop Ijaz said the judiciary needs a functional and transparent accountability mechanism. “However, selective and flawed accountability is not the way forward. The perception of selective accountability compromises any serious attempts to reform accountability mechanisms. The legal community should insist on the highest level of due process and transparency to be upheld,” Mr. Ijaz told The Hindu.
A resolution of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) said it hoped and expected that the Supreme Judicial Council “would not become party to such designs of the government and would proceed with the matter purely in accordance with law and as per the Constitution”.
The PBC said in its resolution, which was passed unanimously, that it considered the judges upright, competent and independent in their judgments, and thought that the reference smacked of mala fide intentions.
The lawyer’s body now expects the government to take back the reference, and if that doesn’t happen, has asked for its quashing by the Supreme Judicial Council.
Taking note of what it saw as the the government’s tactic to divide the bar, the PBC also issued a show-cause notice to Law Minister Farogh Naseem, who is a member of the body, for initiating the reference.
The Faizabad judgment
Sources in the PBC pointed out that Justice Isa had earlier this year penned the Faizabad sit-in judgment, which was very critical of the military’s political role.
“This reference has been initiated from somewhere else. The reason seems quite clear: to blackmail those judges who have independent thoughts and will not compromise according to the whims of the powerful quarters,” PBC member Azam Nazeer Tarar told The Hindu.
Senior lawyer Salman Akram Raja said there was more to the reference than met the eye. “Form has quashed substance. Justice Isa has spoken when others have chosen abdication of duty in favour of silence,” Mr. Raja told The Hindu. Lawyer Reema Omer said that various factors — like the timing and the target of the reference; the feeble allegations contained in it; the propaganda campaign against Justice Isa by the usual suspects and their troll armies; and a prohibition imposed by the media regulator on discussions about the reference — strongly indicate mala fide intention behind the reference.
Ms. Omer added that there were serious questions about whether the necessary procedures were followed before the President referred the complaint to the judicial body.
However, she said: “The Supreme Judicial Council, and even the Supreme Court in its original jurisdiction, have the power to inquire into whether the complaint was frivolous or made with a mala fide intention. It is imperative that this is done to set the record straight and hold those responsible to account.”
(Originally published in The Hindu)
The legal fraternity is up in arms against the reference, which lawyers say was mala fide. Justice Isa is known for his integrity and is also set to be the Chief Justice in 2023 — the year of the next elections.
A senior lawyer associated with the PTI said, on condition of anonymity, that the reference is quite substantial. “There is a divided opinion on the interpretation of law in this regard. The government feels that Justice Isa should have declared the assets of his wife and children while some lawyers think that Article 209 doesn’t pertain to this in any case. This has to be settled by the court essentially. Let’s see how they interpret it.”
He added that accountability of judges is important. “Justice Isa’s financial integrity is not under question here. The issue is that he has not followed the law. Now, it will be probed who bought those properties and by whose money. It should be transparent in any case.”
Lawyer Saroop Ijaz said the judiciary needs a functional and transparent accountability mechanism. “However, selective and flawed accountability is not the way forward. The perception of selective accountability compromises any serious attempts to reform accountability mechanisms. The legal community should insist on the highest level of due process and transparency to be upheld,” Mr. Ijaz told The Hindu.
A resolution of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) said it hoped and expected that the Supreme Judicial Council “would not become party to such designs of the government and would proceed with the matter purely in accordance with law and as per the Constitution”.
The PBC said in its resolution, which was passed unanimously, that it considered the judges upright, competent and independent in their judgments, and thought that the reference smacked of mala fide intentions.
The lawyer’s body now expects the government to take back the reference, and if that doesn’t happen, has asked for its quashing by the Supreme Judicial Council.
Taking note of what it saw as the the government’s tactic to divide the bar, the PBC also issued a show-cause notice to Law Minister Farogh Naseem, who is a member of the body, for initiating the reference.
The Faizabad judgment
Sources in the PBC pointed out that Justice Isa had earlier this year penned the Faizabad sit-in judgment, which was very critical of the military’s political role.
“This reference has been initiated from somewhere else. The reason seems quite clear: to blackmail those judges who have independent thoughts and will not compromise according to the whims of the powerful quarters,” PBC member Azam Nazeer Tarar told The Hindu.
Senior lawyer Salman Akram Raja said there was more to the reference than met the eye. “Form has quashed substance. Justice Isa has spoken when others have chosen abdication of duty in favour of silence,” Mr. Raja told The Hindu. Lawyer Reema Omer said that various factors — like the timing and the target of the reference; the feeble allegations contained in it; the propaganda campaign against Justice Isa by the usual suspects and their troll armies; and a prohibition imposed by the media regulator on discussions about the reference — strongly indicate mala fide intention behind the reference.
Ms. Omer added that there were serious questions about whether the necessary procedures were followed before the President referred the complaint to the judicial body.
However, she said: “The Supreme Judicial Council, and even the Supreme Court in its original jurisdiction, have the power to inquire into whether the complaint was frivolous or made with a mala fide intention. It is imperative that this is done to set the record straight and hold those responsible to account.”
(Originally published in The Hindu)
Comments