Faizabad sit-in: SC lawyer files complaint against 3 superior court judges

Seeks to initiate proceedings of misconduct

ISLAMABAD: A Supreme Court (SC) lawyer has filed a complaint with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) seeking to initiate proceedings of misconduct against three superior court judges for issuing orders to end the Faizabad sit-in.

Kanwar Intizar Muhammad Khan, hailing from Multan, has filed a complaint under Article 209 of the Constitution against two SC and one Islamabad High Court judges and raised 11 questions regarding their orders about the sit-in. A copy of the complaint spread over 66 pages is available with The Express Tribune.



The complaint states that there was clear direction and order by the SC and IHC to remove persons sitting on a portion of the Faizabad interchange. In compliance with the court’s order, the administration on November 25 started operation, in which six persons died.

According to the complainant, army chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa contacted Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi to stop the operation otherwise the situation would become critical.

Later, a meeting was held in the PM House, wherein the army chief also participated and it was resolved that the matter of Khatm-e-Nabuwwat was a very serious and sensitive issue and would be settled through negotiations.

He contended that no court could order the police to use force against protesters. “The act of judges of the SC and IHC lowered the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the public. The order of judiciary also caused such a situation throughout the country which was harmful to peace,” stated the complainant. He also objected to the court’s observation that participants of the dharna were politically motivated.

Khan contended that the judges had violated Articles II, III and V of the Code of Conduct.

The complainant questioned whether the judges could assume the role of magistrate or commanding officer of law enforcement agencies to disperse a crowd and whether the operation was a result of November 23 and 25 orders passed by IHC and SC, respectively. Interestingly, the complainant also reproduced the remarks given by the judges during the hearing of the case.



However, Pakistan Bar Council member Azam Nazeer Tarar expressed concern over the filing of the complaint by an SC lawyer against three superior court judges in view of their judicial orders.

According to the SJC Procedure of Inquiry 2005, whenever the council finds that the information or evidence provided to it was false in material particulars or with the sole intention to malign a judge, or scandalising the court or to undermine it in any form whatsoever, it may direct action against all those who are found to have provided the said information, or evidence as the case may be. For this purpose, the council may direct the secretary of the council to pursue the course of action against the offender.