ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has been requested to pass an order to probe the Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges’ allegations and upon completion order to fix liability for those who undermined the independence of the judiciary by interfering in their judicial work.

The Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA), on Thursday, filed a petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and cited the Federation as respondent.

It urged the Court that if the IHC judges’ matters fall within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) then make a recommendation to it for due consideration.

Six judges of the IHC – Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir, and Justice Saman Raffat Imtiaz, on March 25, wrote a letter to the SJC against the alleged “interference” and “intimidation” by the “operatives of intelligence agencies.”

A seven-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Mussarat Hilali, and Naeem Akhtar Afghan on April 3 heard suo motu, taken on the allegations of the IHC judges, and directed the Attorney General for Pakistan, Mansoor Usman Awan, the vice-chairman Pakistan Bar Council and the president Supreme Court Bar Association to make written submission on next date.

However, Justice Yahya Afridi, in his note, opposed the suo motu and recused from the bench, while Justice Minallah in his five-page note maintained that “interference” in cases with political implications cannot be ruled out, and termed the IHC judges, “whistleblowers”. The IHC Bar is indisputably determined to safeguarding and striving for the supremacy of the Constitution and is mindful that continuing independence of the judiciary and rule of law are essential for the maintenance of due constitutional order.

The petition said that the IHCBA members will not shy away from standing up against aggressor seeking to undermine or contaminate the constitutional promise of delivery of justice to the people without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.

The IHCBA urged that there is no room for any kind of interference in the discharge of judicial functions by any court of law by any external element. The intimidation or harassment of a judge of a High Court, or a judge of the subordinate courts “is not fair game.” The petition said that independence of the judiciary encompasses, (i) independence of the judicature, as an organ of the State, and (ii) independence of individual judges to decide all manner of cases before them in accordance with [the] law. The IHC judges’ letter highlights grave concerns with respect to both.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024