Multan - Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Asif Saeed Khosa has said that the strength of judges is not sufficient as compared to a large influx of cases.
Justice Khosa said that the difference between a judge and a common man is the power to give decision. “If a judge fails to give verdict after hearing a case, there is no difference between him and a Naib Qasid of the court,” he added while addressing a conference on dispensation of justice organised by High Court Bar Association Multan here on Friday.
He said he explained the matter to the new judges with the help of an example that a courtroom was full of court officials, defence and prosecution lawyers, many other lawyers and 40 petitioners. “A Naib Qasid is also present in the courtroom who announces dates for next cases. After hearing the arguments, if a judge still cannot give his decision on the case there is no difference between him and an ordinary man,” he further explained. He exclaimed that why the society would respect a judge in this situation. He said he did not want to discuss such issues but he might not be able to come to Multan again as Chief Justice.
He said “We need to revive old traditions of lawyers besides strengthening the judicial system. We need to impart training to the young lawyers so that justice could be given to the petitioners.”
He said he had decided five years ago that the hearing of any case would not be adjourned in his court. “Unless the lawyer or the judge passes away,” he added.
He said he started his legal practice from Multan and appeared before high court as lawyer on January 10, 1981, the first day of establishment of Lahore High Court Multan Bench. He said previously Dera Ghazi Khan was part of Multan division and he practised as lawyers in this town for many years. He said when Justice Maeen Udden Khan was elevated as Supreme Court judge many people raised objection on it. “They thought it might be favouritism but we told them that it was done on merit and the time will prove it,” he noted.
He said he had profound memories attached to Multan bench. Recalling the time he spent in Multan, the CJP disclosed he remained table tennis champion while Sardar Latif Khan Khosa was captain of cricket team. “He is still captain of many things,” he added. He said he shifted to Lahore when he was elevated as Supreme Court judge. He said during that time no one could even imagine of happening of any tragedy in the courtroom but now the situation had changed. “It is due to two reasons; first the society has become imbalanced and the second senior lawyers have no room for junior lawyers,” he pointed out.
He was of the opinion that the judges were under burden of high number of cases and therefore the lawyers could not be heard properly during the proceedings. He said the judges tried to hear as many cases as possible in a single day and give verdict. He further pointed out that the new lawyers joined less trained lawyers while they entered the profession as a result of which they lacked proper training. He asked the bar to ensure that no young lawyer was without supervision of a senior lawyer.
He said the legal and medical professions were noble and those cheating the law could not be spared. He said wearing a gown was mandatory when he was studying at Cambridge, adding the barristers did not charge any fee at that time as they served the petitioners. “The petitioners used to put some money in their hoods,” he added.
He disclosed his one teacher at Cambridge taught him three things to become a good lawyer. “To become a good lawyer one needs to have command over history, mathematics and literature,” he added. He said the law was enacted to resolve society’s problems and to interpret that law one had to be aware of the history.
Commenting on existing anti-terror law, he said after 20 years when everything would be fine people would know that strict laws against terror were framed because it was need of that time. He said while presenting his argument the lawyer should present his viewpoint before the judge so that the issue can be resolved.
The third point is, he added, that the lawyer should choose good words to transfer his thoughts to other minds so that the issues can be resolved easily.
The CJP was of the opinion that the bar and bench were two wheels of one vehicle while the horse ahead of this carriage was petitioner. “The lawyers and the judges should keep the petitioner in their considerations at every step that how will he get benefit as the whole system is built for him,” he added.