ISLAMABAD - The ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has contended that the judgment on Faizabad sit-in case is sufficient to invite the verdict of professional misconduct against Justice Qazi Faez Isa in terms of Article 209 of the Constitution. 

PTI stated this against the outspoken judge of Supreme Court in its review petition against February 6, 2019 judgment on Faizabad Sit-in Case.

However, Barrister Ali Zafar, counsel for PTI, confirmed that the review petition will be filed today. 

“The learned author Judge (Justice Qazi Faez Isa) declaring and commenting upon aspects of morality and politics, has violated Article V of the above Code of Conduct, which is sufficient to invite the verdict of “professional misconduct” against the learned author Judge (Justice Isa) in terms of Article 209 of the Constitution,” the contents of the review petition stated.

PTI contended that the top court had admittedly made scathing comments on morality, politics and religion despite unambiguously and explicitly stating the limits of Article 184(3). 

“Knowing well that aspects of morality, politics or religion fall outside the limits of the judicial power and jurisdiction of the superior courts, the impugned judgment has rather taken the pains to delve into such aspects,” the review petition stated. 

It added that commenting on morality and politics is abuse and excess of judicial power.

Additionally, it pointed out that the observations regarding PTI’s 2014 sit-in is so one-sided and extreme that the inescapable conclusion is that the author judge Justice Isa was so biased. 

The petition prayed for review of the judgment on Faizabad Sit-in.

Meanwhile, Chairman Awami Muslim League and Federal Minister for Railways Sheikh Rasheed filed a petition before the top court seeking review of its judgment on Faizabad Sit-in in terms of expunging observations against him.

“The report of agencies does not contain any negative attribution towards petitioner (Rasheed) except name of the petitioner mentioned amongst 82 names of individuals and entities but vide impugned judgment petitioner is single out by this Court and specifically attributed role contrary to the report of the agencies,” stated Rasheed in his petition.

Rasheed stated that he had no cavil with the judgment but he is aggrieved of the statement of facts and remarks of top court which, according to him, affecting him. He specifically asked for expunging paragraph 4 of the said judgment dated February 6 of 2019.

“The leaders of the dharna intimidated, hurled threats, abused, provoked and promoted hatred. The media provided unabated coverage to TLP. Anyone having a grouse against the government joined in. The report submitted by Inter Services Intelligence (“ISI”) under the title “Public Support” and subtitle “Political Parties/Personalities” listed the following: “1) Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed (Chairman AML), 2) Ejaz-ul-Haq (PML-Z), 3) PTI Ulema Wing Islamabad released audio message and 4) Sheikh Hameed (PPP)”. Inflammatory speeches were delivered by irresponsible politicians. Some unscrupulous talk-show hosts incited and provoked citizens. The free publicity made TLP, a little known political party, into a phenomenon. Basking in the limelight, TLP’s leadership became ever more intransigent, abusive and aggressive. With each passing day, as they grew in strength and number they became delusional and alleged that people would be rendered objects of Divine displeasure (which is a criminal offence5) unless they followed the chosen path of the TLP. Protests turned violent and spread to other cities,” the paragraph 4 of the said judgment had stated.

Rasheed further contended that the remarks against him were passed without summoning and not being the party in the suo moto proceedings.

He contended that the facts in question were noted erroneously in no glancing the provision of Article 10-A of the Constitution which ordained due process and fair trial.

“The petitioner (Rasheed) owes unshakeable allegiance to the country and is not amongst mischief mongers. Nevertheless the petitioner is strongly in favour amendment in the Election Act, 2017.”  

The judgment had ruled that a person issuing an edict, which harms another or puts another in harm, must be criminally prosecuted under the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016.

Issuing the judgment on suo moto case regarding Faizabad sit-in, staged by Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYR) under the leadership of Khadim Hussain Rizvi, the top court had further ruled that the protestors who obstruct people’s right to use roads and damage or destroy property must be proceeded against in accordance with the law and held accountable.

Mutahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) through its counsel Advocate Irfan Qadir also moved a review petition requesting top court to expunge the observations pertaining to May 12 incident.