ISLAMABAD: In what could be termed an extension of the bitter polarisation already plaguing the politics and the judiciary, the country’s two premier lawyer bodies have drawn daggers, with none ready to defuse the tensions.

The tussle between the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) unfurled on Thursday when the former issued show cause notices to and de-seated two SCBA officials — Muqtedir Akhtar Shabbir and Malik Shakeelur Rehman.

In a tit-for-tat move, the SCBA also suspended the membership of the PBC executive committee members. The SCBA, through a hurriedly filed petition, brought the matter in front of the apex court, which after hearing the case on Friday maintained the status quo for the time being.

The acrimony worsened to such an extent on Friday that the SCBA placed one of its employees to watch that no PBC member should come close to its offices on the first floor of the Supreme Court building. Interestingly, the PBC office is also situated on the third floor of the same block.

After Friday’s hearing, SCBA President Abid S. Zuberi accused the PBC of interfering in the SCBA affairs. He claimed that the real reason behind the split between the two premier bodies was SCBA’s recent decision to conduct a forensic audit of the Supreme Court Bar Housing Society and probe the allegations of human smuggling conducted by certain PBC members.

He claimed that lawyers were yet to receive possession of the plots for which they paid almost eight years ago.

SCBA, PBC indulge in recriminations; efforts to broker truce ‘yield no results’; SC maintains status quo on the issue

The allegations

In its petition, the SCBA had challenged the PBC decision to issue show cause notices and de-seat its officials who also serve as SCBA secretary and additional secretary, respectively.

A senior PBC member denied the allegations, saying that the entire amount has been paid to the previous owners of the lands for taking possession. He said the SCBA office-bearers were de-seated for writing a “derogatory” letter to the PBC.

Mr Zuberi continued that the SCBA was being forced to follow government-dictated policies and the PBC’s executive committee appointed Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon and not him, the SCBA president, to represent the association before the Supreme Court in the matter of holding elections to the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) assemblies.

Meanwhile, Amjad Shah, who also served as PBC vice chairman from 2019 to 202, claimed that the SCBA considered PBC a hurdle as the latter always opposed the former’s attempt to pursue the dictates of a particular political party.

He regretted that instead of invoking the jurisdiction of PBC, an appellate authority of lawyers, the SCA chose to move a petition before the Supreme Court which was even fixed and heard on Friday without a number assigned to it.

Mr Shah said the SCBA called a meeting to take a decision on the housing society affair on April 29, at a time when the majority of the members had gone to Quetta for a lawyers’ convention.

There have also been attempts to end the acrimony, but they are yet to wield any results.

Under the relevant rules, a notice of 15 days or at least one week must be given so that members could attend the meeting from all over the country, Mr Shah said.

‘Unprecedented’ actions

Senior counsel Taufiq Asif told Dawn that he tried his best on Thursday last to convince both groups to forge unity, just like the lawyers united when the presidential reference was instituted against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

“I tried to convince them that instead of fighting like PTI and PDM, we should settle differences by invoking a dispute resolution mechanism,” he said adding instead of heeding the advice, SCBA chose to file the petition before the Supreme Court.

When asked if SCBA could suspend members who were also part of the PBC, Mr Asif said this has never happened in the history of SCBA.

It is a matter of interpretation since the SCBA enjoyed certain administrative authority but such an extreme step has never been taken in the past, he said.

On Thursday, SCBA Secretary Muqtedir Akhtar Shabbir suspended the membership of seven PBC executive committee members, namely Chairman Hassan Raza Pasha, members Syed Amjad Shah, Riazat Ali Sahar, Muhammad Tariq Afridi, Muhammad Masood Chishti, Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon and Syed Qalb-i-Hassan.

Mr Shabbir has also issued a statement saying the SCBA had told the Supreme Court that illegal orders and show cause notices issued by the PBC were against the law.

During the hearing on Friday, the two-judge SC bench, consisting of Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Ayesha A. Malik, noted that the SCBA president, Mr Zuberi, had filed an unnumbered application, which showed that during the pendency of this petition, PBC and its executive committee have already de-seated the secretary and the additional secretary and sent the matter to PBC’s disciplinary committee for further proceedings.

He said SCBA will always stand for the rule of law, the Constitution and the welfare of its members.

SC hearing

The SCBA counsel referred to Rule 118 of the Pakistan Legal Practitioner & Bar Council Rules, 1976 and argued that, under the rule, the only competent authority was the disciplinary committee where a complaint, if any, should have been filed to decide the matter.

The counsel contended that no specific rule or any section of the law was cited in the show cause notices.

When the court asked the counsel why the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) has been invoked directly rather than filing a writ petition in the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, the counsel argued that certain dictums have been laid down by the Supreme Court wherein invoking of High Court jurisdiction was not approved.

In support of his contention, the counsel relied on a 2017 case, Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen vs PBC and another case, Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani vs PBC.

The counsel sought time till the next hearing when he was asked by the court to satisfy it on the maintainability of the petition under Article 184(3) which deals with the issues of public importance and fundamental rights.

The counsel argued that replies to the show cause notices were submitted but, without providing any hearing, the members were de-seated, in grave violation of Article 10-A of the Constitution.

After the illegal move, the matter was referred to the disciplinary committee, he continued.

The counsel requested that since the order of de-seating has not been implemented, it should be suspended.After hearing the arguments, the bench issued notices to Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan as well as PBC and its executive committee on the maintainability of the petition.

Published in Dawn, May 6th, 2023