ISLAMABAD: Federal Ombudsperson for Protection against Harassment of Women at Workplace Yasmin Abbasi told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that neither the top court nor the high court had any jurisdiction over orders passed by the Ombudsperson’s Office.

Ms Yasmin Abbasi, who was summoned by the Supreme Court for issuing warrants of arrest against a sitting puisne Lahore High Court judge, told the Supreme Court that the high court had no jurisdiction to entertain a petition against a matter of which the cognizance had been taken by the ombudsperson in accordance with Section 18 of the Federal Ombudsman Reforms Act.

On a suo motu taken on May 11, Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali had summoned Ms Yasmin Abbasi to appear before the court on Tuesday to explain her position for issuing warrants of arrest against Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, the senior-most judge of the LHC.

Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf also assisted the court in the matter.

On Tuesday, a three-judge Supreme Court bench, headed by Justice Amir Hani Muslim, ordered that a status quo be maintained on proceedings against her in the high court and that the order passed by the ombudsperson against the judge would stay suspended.

Ms Abbasi argued before the Supreme Court bench that the jurisdiction of superior courts over orders of the ombudsperson had been barred under Section 18 of the Federal Ombudsman Reforms Act. She further argued that orders of the ombudsperson could not be challenged in any court except a representation before the president.

She also pleaded to the Supreme Court to club along with the suo motu, her appeal she had earlier filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction that the high court could not entertain and adjudicate a complaint falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Ombudsperson’s Office.

The appeal was moved against Jan 11, 2016, order of the LHC which had initiated criminal proceedings against the ombudsperson by issuing bailable warrants of arrest to compel her to appear before the high court while suspending a decision taken by her on a complaint filed by Sumera Fazil Khan.

She also requested the court to allow her to engage a proper counsel to defend her before the court.

The bench ordered the court office to fix the suo motu matter along with the appeal in the second week of June.

After the court proceedings, Ms Abbasi distributed an unsigned statement among media persons stating that she would establish from facts that it was she who had exercised restraint and also emphasised that the order of the Supreme Court (of summoning her) was factually incorrect.

“There is no question of any apology tendered before the high court as appeared in the order of the high court and the suo motu notice,” she said.

“I tried my best to avoid an unpleasant situation but the high court judge left me with no choice but to invoke my contempt powers,” she said in the statement.

“I firmly hold the view as the ombudsperson that orders of the single judge (LHC) were illegal and void besides being contemptuous and also against the code of conduct for judges,” the statement said.

“I will establish in my written response that I have got the highest regard for the Supreme Court and that is why I will bring true facts and correct legal position to light especially when I am fully conscious of the fact that in the absence of proper assistance, courts often become the subject of criticism,” she stated.

She said that she would file a written reply, along with her preliminary objections, for which some reasonable time was required.

The suo motu notice was taken by the Supreme Court when the federal ombudsperson issued arrest warrants against Justice Shah just a day after the judge dropped contempt proceedings against her after Ms Abbasi tendered an unconditional apology before the judge.

The contempt proceedings, initiated against her for her refusal to appear before the judge, were held in the high court judge chamber on May 9 in which the AG and the Punjab IG also appeared.

The high court order of dropping the contempt proceedings mentioned that the respondent (ombudsperson) had thrown herself at the mercy of the court and submitted an unconditional apology.

The order had also observed that the respondent held out an assurance that no such unfortunate incident would be repeated and that she would act in accordance with law and would give the highest respect to constitutional courts.

But on May 10, the federal ombudsperson held proceedings on a show-cause notice issued earlier to Justice Shah and held in her order that the high court judge had acted in utter violation of the Supreme Court’s order that enjoined the avoidance of an unpleasant situation.

“Resultantly the contempt notice to Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah for his appearance needs compliance as per law,” the order said.

In her order, the ombudsperson regretted that during in camera proceedings before the high court judge, the dignity of the office of the federal ombudsman was greatly compromised and that her institution was undermined in an unprecedented manner hitherto unknown to the judicial history of the country.

Published in Dawn, May 18th, 2016