Lawyers unite to oppose action against CJP
LAHORE, March 10: The sending of presidential reference to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry under Article 209 of the Constitution, and making him ‘non-functional’, has drawn a unified reaction from the legal fraternity. Setting all their differences aside, for the time being, they seem to have only one objective in sight - save the judiciary, the community and the lawyers’ professional dignity.
Notwithstanding bar politics, factional infighting and strife for supremacy over others, the men and women in black coat understand they will have to close their ranks to demonstrate that the lawyers stand as a integrated community of professional people who are determined to frustrate all `conspiracies’. Most of them are of the view that if they fail now, they will be reduced to craven hirelings of the executive which has time and again shown its intentions clear that the judiciary should be so tamed as to follow its dictates.
May it be the Professional Group of Hamid Khan or the Progressive Group lead by Malik Mohammad Qayyum, the legal fraternity has shown the resolve to resist the country’s establishment with the avowed purpose of salvaging the pride of the judiciary of which lawyers are also an integral part.
Vice-chairperson of the Punjab Bar Council, Tariq Javed Warraich, says the PBC will have to practically show that it is prepared to go beyond strikes and boycotts. Lahore High Court Bar Association president Mohammad Ahsan Bhoon understands that the community is under a national obligation to safeguard an important state institution from being eroded.
Almost all the major lawyer bodies, including the Supreme Court Bar Association and the Punjab Bar Council, were in session in Lahore and elsewhere on Saturday to work out a future line of action. The Executive Committee of the Pakistan Bar Council was also holding its meeting to decide the convening of the council’s general meeting early next week.
ABID MINTO: Eminent jurist and the first president of the Supreme Court Bar Association Abid Hasan Minto says that the manner in which the reference has been sent to the Supreme Judicial Council “clearly lacks merit”. No doubt that the Constitution gives powers to the president to invoke the jurisdiction of the SJC, but the time chosen for the action raises doubts about the motive.
Taking to Dawn, Mr Minto says the allegations have been in circulation for months, and there appeared to be no emergency that the Chief Justice of Pakistan should be made ‘non-functional’ on Friday (yesterday), at a time when the next senior most judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Rana Bhagwan Das, is out of the country. This, he says, gives a general impression that the regime, which has devastated all state institutions in its seven-year tenure, did not want to wait for the return of Rana Bhagwan Das who is known for his uprightness and merit-based decisions, to be made the acting chief justice and the head of the SJC.
He says that the manner in which Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was escorted to the Army House in Rawalpindi “like an accused person” and subsequent administrative acts like deploying guards outside his house and snapping all communication links also speaks of mala fide intentions. “Like all the persons facing charges, Justice Chaudhry also has a right to explain his position to defend himself, which is being denied to him”, according to Mr Minto.
BARRISTER ZAFARULLAH: Barrister Zafarullah Khan, on whose petition the Supreme Court struck down the privatisation of the Pakistan Steel Mills, understands that the appointment of Justice Javed Iqbal, also from Balochistan, and the formation of the SJC is unconstitutional because Justice Rana Bhagwan Das, the senior most judge, after the chief justice of Pakistan, is still there.
Talking to Dawn, he says that Justice Rana Bhagwan Das has been appointed as acting chief justice on a number of occasions in the past and the regime should have waited for his return home to meet the constitutional obligations on both counts.
Mr Khan is of the view that the action against Justice Iftkhar Mohammad Chaudhry is apparently motivated by extraneous considerations because the apex court not only prevented the PSM from being privatised without meeting necessary requirements, but also is to fix for hearing of the appeal filed by the government against the decision.