ISLAMABAD: Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel said a judge is appointed for the interest of general public and his judicial conduct is a matter of great public interest and without the trust and confidence of the people, the judiciary cannot exist.
In his separate note of the detailed judgment issued by a five-member bench on February 21, Justice Jamal wrote that the purpose of inquiring into the conduct of a judge while in office is to ensure accountability, to preserve the integrity of judicial process, maintain public trust and confidence in the judiciary.
The detailed judgment and Justice Jamal’s additional note have been uploaded on the Supreme Court website.
The Court ruled that the SJC proceedings once initiated against a judge did not stop upon the retirement or resignation of the judge.
Justice Jamal has severely criticised a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mian Saqib Nisar, saying the ex-CJP has failed to fulfil his constitution, moral and ethical obligation as the country’s top judge as he did not refer the misconduct complaints filed against him to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) during his term as the chief justice.
He noted that as a general rule, the Authority inquiring into the conduct of a judge loses its jurisdiction to initiate proceedings against a person who retires or resigns from his office, before initiation of inquiry proceedings. Whereas, when an inquiry about the conduct of a judge in office is initiated by the Council, it is the constitutional obligation of the Council to conclude the proceedings, form its opinion and report to the President with recommendations. In this provision of the Constitution, the word “inquiry” has been used.
Justice Jamal wrote that the primary purpose of inquiry is to gather information in order to address a specific issue of public interest and to make recommendations for improvement and prevention of future occurrences. It is not to focus on enforcing laws or prosecuting individuals as is mandated in investigation, rather to inquire into the ethical violations and misconduct of a judge. It promotes accountability and trust in the process by the public.
He stated that it is for good reason in the public interest that citizens having fundamental right to know about the fate of the proceedings. When an inquiry into conduct of a judge initiated by the Council is terminated without an opinion, on account of retirement or resignation of a judge from his office, it would render Article 209 (5) and (6) of the Constitution redundant and would also give an authority to the judge to make the constitutional body abandoned.
He said that the termination of inquiry proceedings upon retirement of a judge would otherwise give an impression that the Council is dependent on the will of the judge, who can overpower the control of the constitutional body. It may create a perception that the judges are above the law. After his retirement or resignation, prior to inquiry initiated, a judge enjoys a status of a retired judge, with lucrative post-retirement benefits from public exchequer.
Justice Jamal wrote that a judge is also eligible for his re-appointment against some important constitutional, quasi-judicial and administrative posts, for which evaluation of his conduct and reputation is essential.
The jurisdiction of the Council to inquire into the matter pertaining to misconduct of a judge is a constitutional mandate.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed.