Chief justice asks IHCBA counsel not to burden SJC with the duties, which are not its mandate
Justice Mandokhail says there is interference but govt is not doing anything about it.
ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court of Pakistan Tuesday deferred the hearing in the suo moto notice taken on the allegations of the Islamabad High Court judges’ letter of interference by the operatives of intelligence agencies in judicial functions.
A six-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Musarrat Hilali, and Naeem Akhtar Afghan conducted hearing in this matter.
Justice Minallah said everyone was agreeing that there is interference in judicial matters.
At this, Justice Mandokhail said that there is interference but the government is not doing anything about it.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan sought some time to file the federal government’s response to the apex court’s 30th April hearing. Vice-Chairman Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) Riazat Ali, President Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Shehzad Shaukat and the counsel of Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) Ahmed Hussain Shah presented their proposals.
Justice Athar said that in the last hearing one of the members of the bench had asked the attorney general to tell what is the mandate of the intelligence agencies. Why in the first stage though accepting interference, but doing something about it.
Justice Athar also said that in 2018 the beneficiary was a political party but now some other party is. He added, “The political parties wanted the system to favour them.” He further said that the buck stops at the federal government but why no one is questioning the government. He observed that the matter pertains not only to a letter written by the IHC judges, but after that there are resolutions of all five High Court, adding that by now heads should have rolled.
The IHCBA counsel responded that the federal cabinet had clarified in its statement that they have nothing to do with the incidents mentioned in the IHC judges’ letter. He said due process should not be changed for the judges of the superior judiciary, then people would have confidence in the judiciary. He argued that the impression should not go that the judiciary protects its cadre. The Court has to avoid populism as well, he added.
Justice Afghan remarked that the judges’ statement should not always be considered gospel truth.
The Chief Justice asked the IHCBA counsel not to burden the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) with the duties, which are not its mandate, because Ahmed was repeatedly arguing the SJC should probe the matter.
The CJP said that if tomorrow someone threatens him then he should complain about it to his colleagues, adding that if he does so then my colleagues tell me to sort it out myself. He said; “If I complain about intervention to his colleague then I diminish my own power. He asked, “Why do I give my power to someone instead of using it myself.” He said the judges need to assert their authority.
Justice Jamal said that the main issue should be why the interference takes place. He said three times Martial Law promulgated in the country, and when the judiciary plugged that hole then interference started in different ways.
Ahmed Hassan said that the interference would not end in one day, but it keeps on changing its shapes.
The Chief Justice said the judges are not weak, but they are powerful as no one can remove them except through SJC. The judges are not answerable to Parliament, or any government official or the executive, but they are answerable to their chief justices or the senior judges. The judges have power to issue contempt notice to anyone, who meddle in their judicial functions. The CJP said even a civil judge can’t be removed by the government, the action against him can be taken only by his respective chief justice. It is a self-sustained system, he added.
Justice Faez said; “If we make High Courts subordinate to the Supreme Court then in fact we will weaken them.” Justice Hilal said our (judges) commitment should be with our oath and the constitution.
At the outset of the hearing, AGP Awan requested the court for more time to present his arguments as he had not received a copy of the April 30 hearing.
The Chief Justice said that first, counsels representing lawyer organizations would be heard and then those who are pleading on behalf of individuals.
Upon Justice Faez’s directive, the AGP then read aloud the short order from the last hearing, as well as an additional note penned by Justice Minallah.
“As highlighted by all the high courts, this is the most serious and grave matter undermining the independence of the judiciary, which cannot be trivialised,” he quoted Justice Minallah’s note as saying.
Later, the bench adjourned hearing of the case for an indefinite period till the availability of the bench.