Justice Isa’s petition hearing adjourned until Oct 8, attorney general told to submit response

A bank of nine members of the Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended the hearing of the request of Judge Qazi Faez Isa, against a presidential reference, until October 8 and ordered additional attorney general Amir Rehman to submit a response on the judge's appeal .

Judge Umar Ata Bandial, who headed the bank, said Judge Mansoor Ali Shah, who is a member of the bank, was unable to attend the process because he was on leave. He also noted that Judge Isa Muneer A. Malik's lawyer was ill and had filed a request in court to postpone the hearing before. The request was rejected.

During the process today, the bank said the court will issue notices to all parties, including the attorney general's office. Rehman assured the bank that a written response will be presented at the next hearing.

Judge Faisal Arab, who was part of the bank, said: "It would be better for you (Rehman) to present your response one week before the next hearing."

Judge Bandial commented that the court "will not leave [the case] on hold for a long period of time. "

"This is a matter of our fellow judge," Judge Bandial said. "We will do whatever is in accordance with the law and the Constitution."

Judge Munib Akhtar, another member of the bank, said that all parties should "convince the court of the exemption granted to the prime minister and the president under article 248".

The cusp court had resumed the hearing on a series of challenges to the presidential reference against Judge Isa after setting up a bank of 10 judges last week.

Directed by Judge Bandial, the bank is composed of Judge Maqbool Baqar, Judge Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Arab Judge, Judge Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Judge Sajjad Ali Shah, Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, in case The judge is available, Judge Akhtar, Judge Yahya Afridi and Judge Qazi Muhammad Amin.

The higher court is occupied with nine petitions filed by Judge Isa, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), Abid Hasan Minto, Abdul Basit, who heads the Bar Association of the Superior Court, Quetta, Muhammad Asif Reki, the President of the Quetta Bar Association, the Sindh High Court Bar Association, the Balochistan Bar Council and the Sindh Bar Council.

Petition of Judge Isa

Judge Isa, who is currently facing a referral of misconduct presented by the president against him in the Supreme Judicial Council, in his request for the formation of a full court had argued that the entire court was necessary because the present case referred to a reference against the apex judge of the court and according to the precedent established in judge SC 2010 in the case of Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry.

In support of his argument, Judge Isa argued that the SJC "expressed prejudices" against him in his verdict on reference 427 (a second petition) and, therefore, lost his credibility to give him a fair hearing.

In his request, Judge Isa had said he was ready to face any reference if it was done in accordance with the law and property, but he regretted that he, his wife and children allegedly had been persecuted when the Holy Quran declared that the persecution was worse than death. The request had argued that the petitioner's wife and adult children were illegally monitored through intelligence devices and through the misuse of public funds.

The personal data, records and documents of the judge's wife and adult children were examined, examined, analyzed and analyzed, including the confidential record maintained by Nadra, the FIA, the Passport and Immigration Office, FBR and the Ministry of Interior, according to the request. Then, the information and the mismatched documents harvested were used to paint half-truths and gather a false reference when launching an insidious attack against the judge, he claimed.

The request also mentioned in detail the two meetings of the judge with the president of the Supreme Court of Justice and said that he did not raise these issues simply to assert his fundamental rights, but also because "something much more sinister was happening": the destruction of the independence of the judiciary at the hands of an executive who had exceeded the prescribed constitutional limits.

The petition asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the presidential reference for the sole fact that the plaintiff could not establish the allegations made against the judge as found by the council.