Supreme Court building, Islamabad.-File photo

ISLAMABAD: “I spent not a single penny on my election, but have become bankrupt nevertheless,” said Ghalib Khan, a politician who contested the 2008 elections from a reserved seat of the National Assembly from South Waziristan and now fighting an election appeal before the Supreme Court against his opponent Abdul Malik Wazir.

He has been regularly visiting the Supreme Court and following one such visit he was heard complaining to reporters after his case was adjourned without a hearing: “What’s the use of a decision in an election matter, even though favourable, after three years.”

The filing of a large number of petitions from corruption scandals to perceived constitutional deviations by the government to violation of human rights every other day has overburdened the apex court so much that ordinary litigants sometimes feel ignored because of high-profile and important hearings that certainly need timely intervention by the court.

That was the reason why Supreme Court Bar Association president Asma Jehangir vented frustration when, during her speech at a full-court reference to bid farewell to Justice (retd) Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, she deplored the tendency to adjourn cases, often after several hours of waiting.

“Urgent applications are kept pending for days and weeks,” she had complained, saying the case management by courts was regrettably far from satisfactory.

This is particularly a cause of perpetual anguish for outstation legal counsel, she had regretted, saying court timings were not often observed.

When cases are deferred without any headway, a visit to the Supreme Court from other cities for a large number of litigants is bad news as it has a financial impact. For a few, however, it is also an outing.

“Lunch at Serena,” shouted one of the directors of the Bank of Punjab inside the courtroom after a court hearing the other day during the brief proceedings of which nothing was discussed except what should be the next date when the case involving huge corruption scam be taken up again. “No, the food is better in Marriott hotel,” opposed the other who along with other directors had come all the way from Lahore to attend the court. “OK let’s go to Marriott,” the consensus was finally reached.

Eventually the lawyers representing different sides in the BoP scam themselves settled on a date, suggesting any date after Aug 2 would be fine. The court was, however, inclined to resume the proceedings the very next day.

BOON FOR LAWYERS: When the directors were in a heated argument about the dining place of their choice, ordinary litigants were leaving the courtroom shaking their heads in dismay and cursing their stars. They had waited the entire day only to be told that the rest of the court roaster is discharged.

“It is a boon for lawyers engaged by the state or big corporations even if the case is adjourned a number of times,” said a senior constitutional lawyer, conceding the financial impact was huge on the general public because of the important cases that consume the entire day in court.

“Please transfer my case to any bench other than Court No. 1,” a lawyer pleading the case of an ordinary litigant was heard requesting one of the benches of the Supreme Court when he was asked by the court to choose the next hearing date.

Sharing an experience of an eminent advocate from Karachi, prominent lawyer A.K. Dogar told Dawn how his friend stopped charging his client the cost of the club class air travel from Karachi to Islamabad and stay at a five-star hotel when the case he was pursuing was adjourned for the fifth time.

In countries like the United Kingdom, only a small number of cases are fixed before a bench and every lawyer as well as his clients know in advance that their cases would definitely be taken up.

“To me hearing urgent matters concerning bail or property issues are more important as these involve ordinary people than dedicating the entire day on the presidential reference on revisiting the execution of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto,” Mr Dogar observed.

Muneer A. Malik, a former SCBA president, was of the view that fixing regular cases after first granting appeals at the principal seat in bail matters, rent or family matters at the branch registries of cities from where the cases have emanated would help a lot in removing inconvenience to ordinary litigants.

Advocate Mohammad Ikram Chaudhry suggested that the registrar office should be careful while dealing with matters belonging to lawyers and litigants from outstation which should be heard early in the morning. It will be of great help if the announcement that the rest of the cases will not be taken up be made before tea break or soon after resuming some important case after the break.

It would also be of great help if cases concerning ordinary matters of different litigants be fixed before other benches of the Supreme Court other than the Court No 1.