SC orders full court constitution in Faez Isa case – Pakistan

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the constitution of a full court composed of all available judges to hear a series of challenges to the presidential reference against the judge of SC, Judge Qazi Faez Isa.

A seven-judge SC bank headed by Judge Umar Ata Bandial also ordered that the entire case file be presented to the president of the Asif Saeed Khosa court for an appropriate order in that regard. The directive was issued to promote transparency in procedures, the bank said in a seven-page order. However, he argued that the presentations made by the lawyer representing the prima facie judge had no weight.

The order refers to the hearing on Tuesday of petitions challenging the presidential reference when two judges of the seven-member court, Judge Sardar Tariq Masood and Judge Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, had refrained from hearing the case. It is likely that the president of the court will constitute a complete bank composed of all the judges to hear the case.

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

The court of Apex maintains that the presentations made by the lawyer of the prima facie judge have no weight

The SC order explained that during a 30-minute tea break, the bank members gathered together and as a matter of grace to safeguard the pristine purity, dignity and holiness of the Supreme Court institution and to avoid Any motivated attribution, insinuation or discussion on the current issue by any party, two members of the bank for personal reasons and of their own accord decided to withdraw from these procedures.

On Tuesday, the eminent lawyer Muneer A. Malik, on behalf of Judge Isa, requested the constitution of a full tribunal composed of eligible judges to hear the matter. In explaining the "eligible judges", the lawyer said that the judges on the bench who would possibly benefit from the rejection of this petition should kindly withdraw from the proceedings, in addition to three high-ranking judges who were members of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) . )

Mr. Malik had argued that the possibility of being influenced by any consideration of personal advantage was grounds for challenge under Article 4 of the Code of Conduct of the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Superior Courts. He had also recognized that the dismissal of this petition by the superior court could not in any way imply an adverse recommendation to the president under article 209 of the Constitution against the petitioner. However, he added, the legal community and the public perceive that a personal advantage would be obtained for ineligible judges in the year 2023 if the petitioner did not assume the office of president of the court.

But the SC order explained that the presentations made by the lawyer did not reveal any interest, when the participation of any tangible, palpable, personal or pecuniary interest of a judge always justified its challenge. Rather it was admitted that any tangible interest could accumulate four years later, he said.

"It implies a contingent, prospective and speculative interest," the order said, adding that the lawyer had not cited any precedents for sustaining a future contingency as a disqualifying factor for a judge. its [counsel] The reason, the observed order, is loaded with contingencies and possibly does not pass the test of a "real probability" of prejudice of any member of this bank.

Judge Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, who withdrew from the bank, explained that he had complied with the order and fully agreed with it. He said that his oath of office forced him, in all circumstances, to do good to all kinds of people, in accordance with the law, without fear, affection or ill will, and that he would not allow personal interest to influence his conduct officer or his official decisions. .

"I have not the slightest shadow of doubt in my mind, that I am fully capable and committed to defending, honoring and maintaining the sanctity of every word of my oath," he said in his additional note, adding that in view of the reservations , unfortunately expressed in the name of the petitioner, who was a brother judge of this court, who were not justified or had no basis, in fact, did not consider it appropriate to listen to these requests, so that the petitioner did not attend to the most remote possibility of even a notional element of bias or bias on your part.

Therefore, Judge Ahsan said, taking into account the ancient traditions and practice of this court, for compliance with the rule of law and the highest standards of transparency, impartiality and ownership, in line with his own moral values ​​and for defending, protecting, preserving and improving the dignity and majesty of this great institution, he did not consider it in the ability of things to sit on the bench.

In his request that he sought the constitution of a full court, Judge Isa had explained that he never aspired to the position of judge or president of the court, but accepted the great responsibility when he was called to accept the office of president of the Baluchistan court. Superior Court at a time when the chief judge and all other BHC judges had resigned.

He said he believed that the position of judge should not be desired and that he would normally not hesitate to resign his position, but that doing so in the prevailing circumstances would facilitate the sinister attack launched against the judiciary and its independence. This would also be a betrayal of his oath of office that forced him to preserve and defend the Constitution, Judge Isa said.

Posted on Dawn, September 19, 2019



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here