Despite Nawaz bluster, judges keeping cool

Top lawyers including those close to Sharifs say harsh language unnecessary

ISLAMABAD: In a change from past years, the superior judiciary has shown judicial restraint at the unprecedented onslaught against it from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N).

After the restoration of former chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, from March 2009 to December 2013 the superior judiciary was quite sensitive with regard to any criticism against it. A number of contempt notices were issued to senior politicians, journalists, and even PCO judges over the charges of scandalising and ridiculing the judiciary. During this period criticism of the bench became a no-go area.



Since Justice Chaudhry’s retirement, however, the superior judiciary has shown restraint by issuing significantly fewer contempt notices. In 2017, the Supreme Court has only issued such contempt notices to PML-N senator Nihal Hashmi, the owner of a media house, and one reporter.

After the issuance of the first Panama Papers verdict on April 20, the PML-N started targeting the Supreme Court bench and the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) probing corruption allegations against the Sharif family. This criticism intensified after the July 28 verdict disqualifying former prime minister Nawaz Sharif from holding public offices.

Later, Nawaz went on a rally across Punjab, wherein he severely criticised judges for disqualifying him based off a misdeclaration in his nomination papers. With the passage of time, Nawaz’s criticism on the judiciary has increased. Recently, he announced he would start a movement to improve the judicial system.

Despite this, he managed to get some relief from the SC when it rejected NAB’s appeal for the restoration of the Rs1.2 billion Hudaibya paper mills reference against the Sharifs.

Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Ahsan Bhoon expressed surprise over the SC’s continuing judicial restraint with regard to Nawaz’s speeches. He told The Express Tribune that it appears as if contempt charges appear to be reserved for PPP leaders. The PBC vice chairman said he believes that Nawaz Sharif has gotten relief from the judiciary on numerous occasions since 1993, adding that even decisions during CJ Chaudhry’s tenure went in his favour.

Former Supreme Court Bar Association president Kamran Murtaza, who was very critical of the SC’s Panama judgment, has also expressed serious concern over the language used by Sharif against the judiciary. “Nawaz’s unfair criticism is weakening the supremacy of civilian institutions in the country”, he adds.

Yasin Azad, another former SCBA president, also stated that though he has serious objections to the Panama ruling, criticism should be done fairly.

Meanwhile, a senior PML-N leader admitted that the PML-N should change its policy of targeting judges. He claims that Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is not willing to endorse an anti-judiciary campaign.

Another PML-N leader believes that Panamagate verdict was issued against Sharif family due to poor legal strategy.



Even a member of Sharif’s legal team said his client’s best chance to have resolved the Panama issue was in parliament.

The team member states that there was no need to file so many numbers of documents at the start of Panama proceedings. Due to the submission of fake documents, the case became weak, he adds.

He also admits that the Sharif family has unnecessary targeted the three judges who chose not to disqualify him and formed a JIT to investigate further. “There was no need to make the Whatsapp call an issue at that time. They did not acknowledge that three judges did not endorse the two senior members – Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Gulzar Ahmad – of the larger bench’s judgment to disqualify Nawaz on his false statement,” he further stated. He believes that the Sharifs aggressive attitude against the judiciary has done the party more harm than good.