Sacked IHC judge sees ‘unholy haste’ in his ouster
Shaukat Siddiqui alleges his removal was part of ‘preconceived plan’ of SJC chief
Islamabad High Court (IHC) Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui. PHOTO: MUHAMMAD JAVAID / EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
Challenging his removal on recommendation of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), former Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui has levelled serious allegations against the SJC chairman – the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar.
Justice Siddiqui was sacked on order of the president after the SJC on Oct 11 declared that the serious allegations he levelled against the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) – about its alleged manipulation of benches – during a speech at the Rawalpindi Bar Association could not be substantiated.
Filing a constitutional petition against his sacking under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, the former judge said his removal in an ‘illegal manner’ was part of ‘preconceived plan’ of the SJC chairman who, he claimed, intended to prevent the petitioner from becoming the IHC chief justice.
IHC judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui sacked
“This is itself sufficient ground to establish the mala fide exercise of power by the chairman,” he said.
The petitioner contended that he has been removed in violation of due process and fair trial and in an ‘unholy haste’, which undermined the rule of law and independence of judiciary.
He said he was discriminated against for making a public speech while the SJC chairman went on making speeches, addressing bar council and meeting members of the armed forces including the army chief and even declaring that whole the judiciary incompetent.
“The applicant gave speech in good faith and in the best interest of the judiciary and he should have given an opportunity to explain his position if at all the issue of propriety was involved,” he added.
Regarding denial of his allegation by the IHC Chief Justice Anwar Kasi, the petitioner said Kasi’s response was treated as ‘Gospel truth’ and it may be a coincident that after two days the IHC chief justice was exonerated from all references.
“It may again only [co]incident that on the same issue a SC judge had to resign but Justice Kasi was honourably discharged of all the legal liabilities…Once Justice Kasi chose to file his reply/ letter he was liable to be cross examined by the petitioner judge.
“Underlying value of closed door justice is now considered archaic. The rule of law envisages open justice and public interaction. Nowadays judges give television and press interviews on administration of justice. The only limitation is circumspection and selection of proper language” said the petition.
Siddiqui revealed that before his speech, he had personally approached the IHC chief justice three times regarding the alleged manipulation of benches by the ISI. “On two occasions, the chief justice mentioned the pendency of the references against me before the SJC as a cause of exclusion from division bench and once an order from on higher-ups (ooper waloun ka hukam),” he noted.
IHC judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui sacked
The petitioner judge claimed that he wrote two letters to Justice Kasi regarding the matters on May 30 and June 19. Referring August 18 order regarding the clearance of road and greenbelt in front of the ISI headquarters, he narrated Brig Irfan Ramay alleged visit to his residence on June 27, 2018.
He said the brigadier desired that the petitioner reviewed his order and, upon his refusal, expressed clear annoyance. “Incidentally, some guests who come to congratulate me on performance of Umrah, were also present when this episode took place,” he noted.
He said he informed the IHC chief justice viz-a-viz different tactics being adopted by the ISI personnel and the chief justice directed the IHC registrar to communicate to the Islamabad police chief and the DG ISI about the petitioner’s concerns with regard to his and his family’s security.
“The petitioner has been deprived of his constitutional rights legal rights including the protections under Articles 4, 10 A and 25 of the Constitution which resulted into the impugned report and notification. The petitioner requested the SC to set aside the SJC report and notification dated 11.10.2018,” he added.
Challenging his removal on recommendation of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), former Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui has levelled serious allegations against the SJC chairman – the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar.
Justice Siddiqui was sacked on order of the president after the SJC on Oct 11 declared that the serious allegations he levelled against the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) – about its alleged manipulation of benches – during a speech at the Rawalpindi Bar Association could not be substantiated.
Filing a constitutional petition against his sacking under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, the former judge said his removal in an ‘illegal manner’ was part of ‘preconceived plan’ of the SJC chairman who, he claimed, intended to prevent the petitioner from becoming the IHC chief justice.
IHC judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui sacked
“This is itself sufficient ground to establish the mala fide exercise of power by the chairman,” he said.
The petitioner contended that he has been removed in violation of due process and fair trial and in an ‘unholy haste’, which undermined the rule of law and independence of judiciary.
He said he was discriminated against for making a public speech while the SJC chairman went on making speeches, addressing bar council and meeting members of the armed forces including the army chief and even declaring that whole the judiciary incompetent.
“The applicant gave speech in good faith and in the best interest of the judiciary and he should have given an opportunity to explain his position if at all the issue of propriety was involved,” he added.
Regarding denial of his allegation by the IHC Chief Justice Anwar Kasi, the petitioner said Kasi’s response was treated as ‘Gospel truth’ and it may be a coincident that after two days the IHC chief justice was exonerated from all references.
“It may again only [co]incident that on the same issue a SC judge had to resign but Justice Kasi was honourably discharged of all the legal liabilities…Once Justice Kasi chose to file his reply/ letter he was liable to be cross examined by the petitioner judge.
“Underlying value of closed door justice is now considered archaic. The rule of law envisages open justice and public interaction. Nowadays judges give television and press interviews on administration of justice. The only limitation is circumspection and selection of proper language” said the petition.
Siddiqui revealed that before his speech, he had personally approached the IHC chief justice three times regarding the alleged manipulation of benches by the ISI. “On two occasions, the chief justice mentioned the pendency of the references against me before the SJC as a cause of exclusion from division bench and once an order from on higher-ups (ooper waloun ka hukam),” he noted.
IHC judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui sacked
The petitioner judge claimed that he wrote two letters to Justice Kasi regarding the matters on May 30 and June 19. Referring August 18 order regarding the clearance of road and greenbelt in front of the ISI headquarters, he narrated Brig Irfan Ramay alleged visit to his residence on June 27, 2018.
He said the brigadier desired that the petitioner reviewed his order and, upon his refusal, expressed clear annoyance. “Incidentally, some guests who come to congratulate me on performance of Umrah, were also present when this episode took place,” he noted.
He said he informed the IHC chief justice viz-a-viz different tactics being adopted by the ISI personnel and the chief justice directed the IHC registrar to communicate to the Islamabad police chief and the DG ISI about the petitioner’s concerns with regard to his and his family’s security.
“The petitioner has been deprived of his constitutional rights legal rights including the protections under Articles 4, 10 A and 25 of the Constitution which resulted into the impugned report and notification. The petitioner requested the SC to set aside the SJC report and notification dated 11.10.2018,” he added.