ISLAMABAD: Tensions between the judiciary and the legal fraternity are likely to escalate as a nationwide strike by lawyers continues, with senior counsel Naeem Bukhari accusing the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) president of restraining lawyers from entering the court premises.

On Monday, Mr Bukhari filed an application in the Islamabad High Court, alleging that the IHCBA President Riasat Ali Azad had “physically restrained” his lawyer from entering the court premises.

Due to non-appearance of the lawyer, Justice Babar Sattar had dismissed Mr Bukhari’s petition concerning his dispute with the government over a matter related to Gun and Country Club.

Justice Sattar had strongly reacted to the act of restraining lawyers from entering courts due to a nationwide strike by the legal fraternity, terming it an obstruction of justice. He also wrote a letter to a three-judge administrative committee of the high court to take strict action against those who restrained the lawyers from entering the court premises.

Riasat rejects Naeem Bukhari’s allegation, says he’s complying with legal fraternity’s strike call

The strike call was issued by the top lawyers’ bodies to express solidarity with the legal fraternity after what they called disturbing events of Punjab police brutality against lawyers who were peacefully protesting the “unlawful divisions” of the civil courts in Lahore.

The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) condemned the police action and issued a full-day nationwide strike call for all courts, including the Supreme Court, high courts, and subordinate judiciary.

Justice Sattar dismissed several cases because of the absence of lawyers, including that of Mr Bukhari.

On Monday, Mr Bukhari requested Justice Sattar to restore his petition, claiming that his counsel Kashif Nawaz Siddique “was present in the Islamabad High Court in order to appear before the honorouble court, but was physically restrained by the president of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association and other office-bearers upon entering the court premises”.

“Upon insisting to tender appearance before your Lordship, heated words were exchanged between the undersigned and IHCBA president, who refused to allow any lawyer to discharge their professional obligations or proceed to court,” said the application.

Mr Bukhari stated that numerous senior counsel along with the undersigned were “stopped at the main entrance and despite their best efforts were not allowed to proceed the courtrooms on the assurance by the IHCBA president that the honourable judges of the IHC had been informed in advance, who had in turn assured that no adverse order would be passed on the said day”.

According to sources in judiciary, the application attracts Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Ordinance that defines “criminal contempt” as “the doing of any act with intent to, or having the effect of obstructing the administration of justice.”

IHCBA president’s response

IHCBA President Riasat Ali Azad, when contacted, said he had never tried to forcibly stop any lawyer and was complying with the strike call issued by the Pakistan Bar Council to express solidarity with the lawyers who were badly tortured by the police and some of them are still in ICU.

He said the PBC would initiate disciplinary proceeding against the president and secretary of the bar association over non-compliance if he would not observe the strike. He pointed out that the Punjab Bar Council has suspended the licences of three lawyers — Zafar Nawaz, Abdul Samad Langah and Shahid Sajjad Siddqui — for not observing the strike call.

He said the absence of a lawyer because of protest is not an obstacle as the litigant can appear beforethe court.

Published in Dawn, May 14th, 2024