ISLAMABAD - Judge of Supreme Court Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi has urged the apex court to declare the initiation of proceedings by the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) as coram non judice, without lawful authority and of no legal effect and quash the same. In this regard, five senior lawyers including Sardar Muhammad Latif Khosa, Khawaja Haris Ahmed, Makhdoom Ali Khan, Syed Ali Zafar and Saad Mumtaz Hashmi on Monday filed a petition on behalf of Justice Naqvi against the SJC and the showcause notice issued to him on 28-10-23. The petitioner further asked the Court to declare that the purported show-cause notice dated 28-10-23 and the hearing notice dated 13-11-23 are without lawful authority and of no legal effect and quash them.
The lawyers submitted that the petitioner has been facing a malicious campaign since 16-02-2023.
False and baseless allegations have been openly and publicly levelled against him. A media trial has been conducted. This malicious campaign and the complaints are a direct and blatant attack on the independence of the judiciary.
They said that it is evident from the record that the manner in which the proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by issuing the show-cause notice dated 28-10-23 by the Supreme Judicial Council is repugnant to and inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to him by the constitution. It is also in direct conflict with the judgments of the Supreme Court. They added that the issuance of press release dated 27-10-23 without the petitioner’s consent not only violates his Fundamental Rights, but also subjects him to a media trial and further maligns and ridicules him the public eye. Further, they said that the hearing notice dated 13-11-23 without first deciding the legal and constitutional objections raised in the petitioner’s preliminary response and without re-constituting the SJC, contravenes Article 209 of the constitution and the Supreme Judicial Council Procedure of Enquiry 2005.
Justice Naqvi, in 18-page preliminary reply, sought recusal of three members of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), which is set to hear misconduct complaints against him. He raised objections on the participation of three judicial members, namely CJP Faez, Justice Sardar Tariq and Justice Naeem Afghan, and sought their recusal based on “bias” and other grounds. He stated that the three senior judges ought not to hear the complaints against him in the interest of propriety, justice and fairness. “The proceedings against me have been conducted in a manner which is ex facie discriminatory and these, therefore, violate Article 25 of the Constitution”, he wrote in reply. He wrote that the preliminary objections are not a reply to the show-cause notice dated October 28, 2023 either on issues of jurisdiction or of maintainability. It is also not a response on merits.
He continued that there was no discussion or inquiry into the allegations against the petitioner. No information was sought either from him or any other quarter to verify the allegations. Unlike, in the case against the Justice Sardar Tariq Masood no information was even sought from the complainants. There were not required to be present on the next date. It was no observed that any information they want to bring forward may also be supplied to the petitioner
