• Says attack on judiciary’s independence won’t be tolerated
• Insists ex-chief justice Jillani recused himself after baseless criticism
• Justice Mansoor stresses SC can’t ‘bury its head like ostrich’ in face of allegations

ISLAMABAD: Any attack on the judiciary’s independence would not be tolerated, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa said on Wednesday and hinted at forming a full court to hear the allegations of intelligence agencies’ interference in judicial affairs.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, the second senior-most judge after the chief justice, also emphasised that the Supreme Court could not “bury its head in the sand like an ostrich” in the face of complaints about meddling in judicial affairs.

He said such complaints needed to be plugged by laying down a strong institutional response through a stringent code of conduct for judges to ensure the independence of the judiciary.

Their remarks came as the Supreme Court took up the case about allegations made by six Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges regarding interference by the country’s security apparatus in judicial matters.

A seven-member bench — led by Chief Justice Isa and also comprising Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Yahya Afridi, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Athar Minallah, Musarrat Hilali and Naeem Akhtar Afghan — conducted the hearing, which was streamed live on the Supreme Court’s YouTube channel.

Chief Justice Isa said the crux of Wednesday’s proceeding should be that the court would not tolerate interference in judicial matters.

He explained that seven judges conducted the hearing because only this many judges were present in Islamabad, while the rest were either in Karachi or Lahore. The hearing was then postponed to April 29 or 30, after which the proceedings may continue daily.

On April 1, the Supreme Court took suo motu notice and formed a seven-judge bench after former CJP Tassaduq Hussain Jillani withdrew himself to head the one-person inquiry commission proposed to investigate the allegations levelled by the IHC judges against intelligence agencies.

‘Interference must end forever’

During the hearing on Wednesday, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah recalled that the IHC judges, through their letter, were seeking suggestions on what to do if something similar happens again in future.

“We cannot bury our heads in the sand like an ostrich. A system is needed on this matter from a civil judge up to the Supreme Court. The series of interference in the judiciary must end forever,” Justice Shah noted.

He also stressed that the apex court was not interfering in high court affairs but only wanted to empower the high court judges on how to conduct if such thing happens again.

Justice Shah urged bar councils like the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and the Supreme Court Bar Association to come up with suggestions in this regard to close this chapter for now and forever.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail also tried to dispel the impression that the court was doing this exercise for its own cause. He also referred to the filing of a reference against Justice Isa, recalling how the then-prime minister Imran Khan had accepted that it was a mistake and wondered whether the government ever tried to identify the culprits behind it.

Justice Athar Minallah cited an example of granting bail to certain accused by the court recently, but later, the order of the apex court was frustrated by not releasing the accused under the maintenance of public order. The court cannot shut its eyes over extensive abuse, Justice Minallah regretted, adding that the Supreme Court was the custodian of citizens’ fundamental rights.

He also regretted over government’s failure to take the matter of Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din Mirza, who had threatened and hurled abuses against the CJP as well as the institution of the judiciary, to its logical conclusion by emphasising that prosecution was the function of the executive.

Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan had referred to the Mian Iftikhar incident.

Addressing Mr Awan, Justice Minallah said: “You have rightly said that there was political engineering till some time and probably, the perception is that this court was also involved. But what the (IHC judges’) letter is saying is that that is continuing and this is of utmost importance.”

What the IHC judges have pointed out was the normalisation of culture of deviance on part of the state, Justice Minallah regretted.

The attorney general explained that only because of public importance, the federal government had proposed the commission under the Pakistan Inquiry Commission Act 2017.

Recusal due to ‘baseless criticism’

He dispelled an impression that the present government was interfering in judicial matters and said that if the matter involved the independence of the judiciary, the credibility of the executive was also at stake.

However, he assured full cooperation on behalf of the government, also reminding that the prime minister was at the Supreme Court within 24 hours after the full court meeting for consultation and the government appointed the commission since the law said so.

The attorney general contended that there were three aspects: if some code of conduct has to be given, it could be done through the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC); if some guidelines have to be made for the high courts, it could be done through the Supreme Court; and if the court considers the need for an inquiry commission, the court can make a mechanism for which the federal government was committed to extendins complete support.

However, he disagreed with a view that the inquiry commission was powerless, insisting that the commission had great powers, including powers enjoyed by the civil or criminal courts or initiating contempt proceedings, adding that an impression was given as if the federal government wanted to make the commission of its own wish.

At this, Chief Justice Isa regretted that baseless criticism and personal attacks were made against former CJP Jillani, adding that Mr Jillani recused after whatever was said about him on social media.

Justice Isa also said the impression that the Supreme Court had given its powers to the government or the commission was completely wrong.

Published in Dawn, April 4th, 2024