ISLAMABAD: The government and the legal community on Thursday came out against a “malicious and slanderous campaign against the chief justice of Pakistan” on the basis of a decision of the Supreme Court, saying that some elements had used completely false and forged information to incite violence and hatred.

The controversy over the apex court’s judgement in the case of Mubarak Ahmed Sani versus the State also prompted the SC to release its own clarification, forcefully disputing the impression that the top court had deviated from the Second Constitutional amendment or asked for the annulment of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) sections that deal with punishment for offenses against religion.

In their statement, Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) Vice Chairman Riazat Ali Sahar and PBC Executive Committee Chairman Farooq H. Naik deplored the campaign “designed to bring the Supreme Court into disrepute and make the CJP vulnerable.

“The PBC demands that an urgent and robust action is taken against all those involved in this dangerous and nefarious campaign, to malign the judicial system and create mistrust upon judges so as to erode independence of judiciary which tantamount to creating obstacles in progress of Pakistan and tarnishing image of Pakistan,” they said.

Apex court statement says it did not deviate from 2nd amendment or seek annulment of PPC sections dealing with offences against religion

A similar message was given by caretaker Information Minister Murtaza Solangi and Pakistan Ulema Council (PUC) chairman Tahir Ashrafi, who said that the Supreme Court’s decision of Feb 6 was being exploited by certain elements to create unrest and anarchy.

Talking about the campaign against the chief justice, Mr Solangi said that social media platforms like Twitter, YouTube, Instagram have their responsibilities and if they are unable to contain such activities, the government has the right to take appropriate action. However, he did not define what he meant by “appropriate action”.

The minister said freedom of expression had its limitations, which were defined by the law. The judiciary, the armed forces and brotherly countries cannot be subjected to criticism, he added.

“I want to tell everybody that this is a legal matter and it will be settled in the court,” said Mr Ashrafi, adding that there was no threat of changes to the laws that uphold the sanctity of Islam, the Holy Quran or the finality of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him).

“We have to keep in mind that our religion is a faith of peace and love for the whole world, and everyone should refrain from creating unrest in the country under any pretext.”

The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) also issued a statement in support of CJP Isa.

Supreme Court’s clarification

In a subsequent press release issued on Thursday, the apex court explained that the decision handed down on Feb 6 was based on a legal hitch, i.e. even if all the allegations levelled in the FIR were accepted to be true, the sections under which the accused was booked did not apply.

The alleged offence attracts Section 5 of the Criminal Amen­dment Act of 1932, which explains that the publication of prohibited books is punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months.

“Since the petitioner/accused had already spent a period of more than one year in prison, the Supreme Court judgement had ordered his release on bail while keeping in view the Islamic injunctions, constitutional provisions and the requirement of the criminal justice system,” the press release explained.

Unfortunately, such cases always give way to emotions in which Islamic teachings were always ignored, the statement regretted, while recalling different verses from the Holy Quran that were also referred to in the judgement.

In the verdict, provisions of the Constitution regarding religious freedom of non-Muslims were clearly cited, in which it was held that these rights were subject to the law, public safety and morals.

These laws explained that every citizen will have the right to profess his religion, to practise and express it and that every religious group and sect will have the right to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions.

In a case of similar nature, the statement recalled, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court had given a detailed decision through 1993 SCMR Zaheerud Din versus the State case, from which the present case has made no deviation.

The statement clarified that if someone believes that there was an error in the judicial decision in the interpretation of an Islamic principle or any legal provision, he has every right to file a review petition for its correction.

But launching a vicious campaign against the institution of judiciary and its judges without taking rec­ourse to the review jurisdiction was not only reprehensible and unfortunate but also contrary to Article 19, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, but subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the law, the statement said.

Published in Dawn, February 23rd, 2024