ISLAMABAD: After a chronic session, the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on Monday adjourned till Tuesday its proceedings to contemplate complaints towards a sitting judge of the Supreme Court — Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi.
Senior counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmed represented Justice Naqvi and superior preliminary arguments earlier than the council which can proceed once more on Tuesday. During the proceedings, the officers of the Lahore Cantonment Board had been additionally current.
The SJC rejected a grievance towards Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, himself an SJC member. During the final listening to on Oct 27, complainant Amna Malik was directed to provide materials in help of her grievance.
Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, the SJC comprised Justice Masood, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti, and Balochistan High Court CJ Naeem Akhtar Afghan. On Monday, the SJC recorded the assertion of Amna Malik, who was additionally questioned and the grievance was additionally exhibited.
Forum dismisses gripe towards Justice Masood after complainant backs down
The SJC had issued a discover to Justice Masood with a course to stay in attendance if he wished to rebut the allegations towards him. The complainant was questioned however gave unsatisfactory solutions, somewhat withheld info. The complainant conceded that her grievance was not justified in mild of the paperwork seen by her.
Justice Masood was of the view that since he had been publicly defamed and because the complainant herself conceded that it was factually incorrect, he requested that motion be taken towards her and towards Advocate M Azhar Siddique, who had tweeted her grievance.
Justice Masood had additionally requested that since he was publicly defamed, he ought to be publicly exonerated too, and that the order handed on Monday in addition to the examination of the complainant and answers to questions be disclosed.
Since the complainant herself acknowledged that her grievance mustn’t have been filed because the allegations weren’t appropriate, the SJC held that there was no substance to the grievance. Consequently, the SJC opined that the grievance was filed maliciously to defame Justice Masood. However, the SJC determined the choice on proceedings towards the complainant for submitting a false grievance could be taken later.
About the request of Justice Masood, SJC acknowledged that Clause 13 of the Supreme Judicial Council Procedure of Enquiry 2005 stipulated that the proceedings of the council ought to be performed in-digicam and shouldn’t be open to the general public.
However, Clause 13(3) of the process additionally states that the proceedings, in that case directed by the council, could possibly be reported. Accordingly, contemplating the request of Justice Masood, who needs public exoneration, the acknowledged proceedings ought to be reported by the secretary of the council and uploaded on the Supreme Court’s web site, it stated.
In view of the truth that the grievance was acknowledged to be tweeted by M Azhar Siddique, the SJC issued discover to the lawyer to clarify inside every week whether or not he tweeted the grievance and if in affirmative, why ought to motion underneath the legislation not be taken towards him, the order stated.
‘Without lawful authority’
Meanwhile, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi on Monday challenged the Oct 28 present-trigger discover issued to him by the SJC, stating the initiation of proceedings was coram non judice and with out lawful authority.
Moved by means of a panel of heavyweight attorneys specifically Makhdoom Ali Khan, Khawaja Haris Ahmed, Sardar Latif Khosa and Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, the petition contended that the judge had been dealing with a malicious marketing campaign since Feb 16, 2023, as false and baseless allegations have been overtly and publicly levelled towards him.
A media trial has been performed and “the malicious marketing campaign and the complaints had been a direct and blatant assault on the independence of the judiciary”.
The petition argued whether or not the participation of Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, senior puisne judge Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, and BHC CJ Naeem Akhtar Afghan within the proceedings of SJC ensuing within the discover issued to the petitioner make all orders handed in such proceedings as with out lawful authority and of no authorized impact.
It is clear from the document that the style wherein the proceedings have been initiated and the SJC issued SCN on Oct 28 was repugnant to and inconsistent with the elemental rights assured to him by the Constitution.
The discover can also be in direct battle with the Supreme Court judgements. The launch of a press assertion by the SJC with out his consent not solely violates his basic rights but additionally topics him to a media trial, he added.
Published in Dawn, November twenty first, 2023