Islamabad High Court's (IHC's) Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui's allegations of ISI meddling in the judiciary's functioning and collaboration in this allegedly sordid affair of the IHC Chief Justice (CJ) Mohammad Anwar Kasi and even those higher up have rocked the judiciary and legal fraternity and thrown the whole judicial institution into turmoil. These allegations were made by Justice Siddiqui during an address to the Rawalpindi District Bar Association (RDBA) on July 21. Such serious allegations of course could not go unnoticed. First, the ISPR DG Major General Asif Ghafoor in a statement requested the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar to conduct an investigation into Justice Siddiqui's charges against a premier intelligence agency and the judiciary. CJP Saqib Nisar took notice of the affair, obtained from Pemra the recording and transcript of Justice Siddiqui's address and wrote to IHC CJ Kasi to gather any and all evidence from Justice Siddiqui regarding his claims and forward the same with comments to the SC. While the IHC CJ is named in the allegations, the route taken is appropriate and perhaps also will give CJ Kasi the opportunity to defend himself against the serious charges against him. Justice Siddiqui had earlier written a letter to CJP Saqib Nisar, asking him to appoint an independent judicial commission to look into the matter. There is no report on whether the CJP responded to Justice Siddiqui's request, but while hearing an application (later withdrawn) against Justice Siddiqui, the CJP assured that justice would be done by all including Justice Siddiqui. The legal fraternity too seems disturbed by all this. The Lahore High Court Bar Association, Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and RDBA have distanced themselves from Justice Siddiqui's remarks by dubbing them a violation of the judges' code of conduct and allegedly politically motivated. The RDBA has clarified that it had invited Justice Siddiqui to deliver a lecture on legal ethics but he chose to use the occasion to level his startling charges. They have unanimously demanded the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) take immediate action against Justice Siddiqui. But after all this to and fro, the consensus of the legal fraternity, led by the PBC, appears to have settled on the demand that an SC full court hear the matter of grave national importance with serious implications for the credibility, respect and dignity of the judiciary.
CJP Saqib Nisar has stated that attempts are being made to defame the judiciary. Any harm, he correctly argues, to the institution can jeopardise the country's stability. One may add, danger exists for the democratic system per se if the institution of the judiciary loses the trust and confidence of the people in a political construct rooted in the rule of law. It is the judiciary that is the bulwark for redressal of grievances against the executive and other state institutions that may act arbitrarily, particularly against citizens. Admittedly, the people of Pakistan justly harbour reservations about the judiciary's endorsing every martial law and military takeover in our history. Optimists would like us to believe that the judiciary has evolved since then and a repeat of that sorry track record is unlikely in the future. We earnestly hope they are right. But the issue under discussion is not, as in the past, the judiciary's legitimisation of military coups; it is the alleged interference by ISI in the independent functioning of the judiciary for partisan political purposes. Endorsement of military coups in the past at least had the benefit of openness. This allegation is both much more insidious, dripping with cloak and dagger dread, and so grave that it must be thoroughly examined and either refuted or, if any of the allegations have even a grain of truth in them, bring any alleged perpetrators or collaborators within the reach of the long arm of the law. Only in this manner can the serious besmirching of the judiciary's credibility be washed clean and its respect, dignity and the people's trust restored. It is a task of urgent national importance, since, as has been argued above, any political system, let alone a democratic one, rests on the foundations of the rule of law, with the judiciary at its heart.