ISLAMABAD:
Attorneys are elevating their voices over the Islamabad Excessive Courtroom’s (IHC) order summoning the unique document pertaining to the LLB diploma of Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri.
An IHC division bench, led by Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, has issued a two-page order for its proceedings held on December 2.
It mentioned the courtroom “with out touching the deserves of the case at this stage” requisitioned from the College of Karachi by the Larger Schooling Fee (HEC) the unique document pertaining to the LLB diploma of Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri.
It directed the competent authority of the HEC to safe and produce the document earlier than the courtroom, together with its verification standing, by a certified officer of the college totally conversant with the details of the matter agitated within the writ petition.
“After perusal of the document and consideration of the maintainability of the moment writ petition, this courtroom shall additional proceed with the matter.” It additionally directed the amicus curiae to deal with this courtroom on the purpose of maintainability of the petition additionally on the subsequent listening to on December 9.
Barrister Salahuddin Ahmed, who was counsel for Justice Jahangiri within the Sindh Excessive Courtroom, mentioned the order handed by Bench-I of the IHC clearly violated the sooner Supreme Courtroom order on this case, directing that the excessive courtroom ought to first resolve the workplace objections relating to maintainability of the petitions earlier than continuing additional.
“Certainly, when considered in mild of the sooner interim order handed by the IHC Bench-I whereby Justice Jahangiri was restrained, ex parte, from performing capabilities (regardless of clear and categorical precedents of the Supreme Courtroom stating this can’t be accomplished), there could possibly be a critical objection as to bias on the a part of the members of this bench,” he mentioned.
Former further legal professional common Waqar Rana acknowledged that the courtroom couldn’t summon the document earlier than deciding the problem of maintainability, notably when the Supreme Courtroom had already ordered it.
“Furthermore, the amicus curiae apparently belong to a celebration which is in energy and there’s a probability of bias, in mild of the Wali Khan case (1976). He ought to have recused,” mentioned ex-AAGP Rana.
Advocate Faisal Siddiqi, commenting on the IHC order, mentioned the order is a whole violation of the Supreme Courtroom order as a result of the apex courtroom had directed the courtroom to first resolve the workplace’s objections.
“It’s apparent that the true function of this order is just not solely to render Justice Jahangiri’s SHC petition infructuous, but additionally to embarrass him and to drive him to resign,” he acknowledged.
A former legal professional common for Pakistan, who wished to not be named, additionally expressed shock that the IHC didn’t even problem discover to the petitioner.
“Undue haste, as the subsequent date is 9/12. Ex parte determination on benefit first after which maintainability might be examined. Additionally, whether or not the chief justice himself may hear this case?” he additional questioned.
Not too long ago, the Supreme Courtroom dominated {that a} decide of the identical courtroom can’t problem any type of writ nor take any motion towards one other decide of the identical courtroom.
“The constitutional scheme of immunity to judges of the superior courts is to safe the independence of the judiciary, which is the command of Article 2A of the Structure.
“It is because of this {that a} decide of the identical courtroom can’t problem any type of writ nor take any motion towards one other decide of the identical courtroom.
“Reliance on this behalf is positioned on the case of Muhammad Ikram Chaudhry,” mentioned an 11-page detailed judgment authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail whereas listening to the contempt case towards SC Extra Registrar Judicial Nazar Abbas over his failure to repair a case earlier than a bench in violation of judicial orders.
The order acknowledged that, by advantage of holding constitutional workplace, sub-Article (5) of Article 199 of the Structure granted immunity to judges of the Supreme Courtroom and excessive courts for acts carried out inside their judicial and administrative capability.
“The analogy for offering immunity is to stop a decide of a courtroom from misusing jurisdiction and authority by judging and controlling a fellow decide of the identical courtroom.
“It protects the decide towards any interference from exterior or inside the establishment. It safeguards the integrity and authority of the courtroom and boosts the flexibility of judges to carry out their duties easily, making certain their selections will not be influenced by worry of being subjected to any antagonistic motion.
“The idea of immunity is to protect the authority of the judicial establishment, which is essential for the rule of legislation and for correct administration of justice.”
The courtroom additional noticed that if a decide of a superior courtroom can’t problem a writ to a different decide of the identical courtroom, then a decide can’t be given the facility to problem instructions or provoke proceedings beneath Article 204(2) of the Structure towards a sitting decide of the identical courtroom and punish him for committing contempt of courtroom.
“The allegation of misconduct towards a decide of the Supreme Courtroom or a excessive courtroom can solely be inquired into and handled beneath Article 209 of the Structure by the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC),” the order mentioned.
