Upholding objections: CJP declines to list details on cases against judges

Rejects plea seeking disclosure of complaints against justices

ISLAMABAD: Upholding the registrar office’s objections, the country’s top judge has rejected a constitutional petition, seeking disclosure of the total number of complaints received against the superior judges and their disposal ratio since the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) was constituted.

On April 30, the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) Human Rights Committee chief Raheel Kamran Sheikh filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan a constitutional petition, requesting it to pass orders to restrain the guilty individuals from performing duties as judges in cases where the SJC deemed it appropriate. He also pleaded for the swift disposal of the complaints against superior court judges pending with the council.

However, the SC registrar office on May 6 returned the petition after terming it ‘frivolous’. Later, the petitioner through Munir A Malik filed an appeal against the registrar’s objections.



After the passage of four months, the Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali on September 29 took up the petitioner’s appeal in his chamber but reserved the verdict after hearing the arguments.

The court on Monday released a two-page order, wherein the chief justice said he was of the opinion that “the prayer made by the petitioner in his petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution is violative of the spirit of Articles 209 and 211 of the Constitution read with the Procedure of Enquiry.”

The order said: “It is an important aspect of the proceedings before the SJC that at every stage of its proceedings, within parameter prescribed under Rule 13 and other enabling provisions, complete confidentiality and secrecy is to be maintained about the actions taken by the council under Article 19-A which itself provides for reasonable restriction will have over-riding effect to it.”

“This being the position, the office objections are sustained and this appeal is dismissed,” it said.

According to the Rule 13, the SJC proceedings shall be conducted in-camera and shall not be open to public. Only the findings of the proceedings shall be allowed to be reported and proceedings of the meetings or any other steps that the council may take shall not be reported, unless directed otherwise.

Commenting over the verdict, Raheel Kamran Sheikh said the decision is contrary to the precedent in former CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry’s case, wherein a constitution petition was allowed to quash proceedings before the SJC and in the said case, those judges who were part of the SJC did not hear the petition

“The judiciary wants transparent accountability of everyone else but the decision shows that it wants to keep its own accountability secret,” he said, adding that the judgments of a large SC bench have been ignored while interpreting Article 19A and its implications on judicial accountability.

“The decision is contrary to the speeches made by the CJP himself on various occasions on the subject of transparent judicial accountability,” he claimed

The council held several meetings and shortlisted few cases of misconduct against the high courts’ judges during the tenure of incumbent chief justice. Likewise, show cause notices were also issued to a few high courts judges and one of them also challenged the council’s proceedings against him. A couple of the high court judges, who were served show cause notices by the council, had voluntarily stopped judicial work for a short period of time but now they had once again started working and were sitting in the courtrooms for hearing the cases.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 4^th, 2016.