Govt rebuked for ignoring ‘embarrassingly deplorable’ conditions of Sector F-8 Kutchery

IHC seeks time-frame for shifting courts to judicial complex

ISLAMABAD: Terming the conditions in the district courts as “embarrassingly deplorable” and a “classic example of denial of the fundamental rights of access to justice to the actual stakeholders and undermining the rule of law”, a high court on Monday observed that the state had failed to fulfil its obligations and appeared disinterested in solving the situation.

The court subsequently ordered the government to provide a definitive time frame to shift the courts to the new judicial complex.

This was directed on Monday by a Islamabad High Court (IHC) bench, comprising Chief Justice Athar Minallah, while hearing a petition filed by Muhammad Ikram over the situation in the Sector F-8 kutchery.

During Monday’s hearing, Interior Ministry’s Deputy Secretary Tariq Aleem appeared before the court along with officials of the law ministry and the Capital Development Authority (CDA).

During the proceedings, Chief Justice Minallah observed that it seems like the government was not embarrassed by the poor condition of the lower courts. He wondered what was the condition of lower courts in the rest of the country when they are in such deplorable conditions in the federal capital.

“The embarrassingly deplorable conditions in the district courts is a classic example of denial of the fundamental right of access to justice to the actual stakeholders and undermining the rule of law,” Justice Minallah later observed in his order.

“It manifests failure of the state in fulfilling its obligations under Article 37 of the Constitution,” he further observed.

“It is reiterated that ensuring that every citizen has access to an effective and affordable justice system is one of the most important fundamental right and a constitutional obligation of the State. The appalling conditions at the District Courts of the Capital of Pakistan speak volumes for the priority given by successive governments since 1980 to the litigants and their fundamental right of access to justice,” the order read.

Justice Minallah posed whether ministers and secretaries in the federal secretariat should trade places with judges Kutchery because only then would they realize the extent of the conditions in the district courts.

Aleem pleaded before the court that they will submit a detailed report before the court but that they require time for this purpose. At this, Justice Minallah noted that the process has been going on since 1980.

“How much more time do you want?” Justice Minallah asked, adding that the government’s casual attitude manifested in a situation that there are no washrooms for judges in the kutchery.

“Litigants are disturbed but the government does not seem to care,” he added.

The judge remarked that if the project concept-I (PC-I) of the judicial complex was not approved initially, the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) Chief Commissioner and CDA chairman should have made a second PC-I. He added that the secretaries of interior, planning, law, and finance would be summoned personally if a new plan was not devised within 15 days.

The court then directed the federal government to inform the court about the time frame for shifting the courts from the privately owned commercial buildings in Sector F-8 Kutchery to a purpose-built Judicial Complex.

The IHC further directed the federal government to inform the court about when construction on the new high court building will be completed so that construction on the Judicial Complex on a plot in Sector G-10 can start.

Secretary of the interior ministry was directed to submit a report before the next date in consultation with the respective secretaries from the ministries of Housing and Works, Planning Division, Finance Division, and Law along with CDA chairman and the ICT chief commissioner.

The court then adjourned the case until May 23.

Whole world against ex-judge?

A three-member bench of the Supreme Court (SC), headed by Justice Musheer Alam, heard appeals filed by former additional district and sessions judge Raja Khurram Khan and his wife Maheen Zafar in the child maid assault case.

During Monday’s hearing, Khurram’s counsel reiterated his argument that the child maid had confessed that she was not assaulted. He argued that the 10-year-old’s bruises were accidental and claimed that she had memorized the statements she gave during her cross-examination.

At this, Justice Ijazul Ahsan wondered why would a ten-year-old lie during cross-examination in court.

He went on to observe that the child maid had been rescued by neighbours of the judge while she had been found shivering in the extreme cold after the incident.

"You certainly have children. Would your kids, who study in good schools, be able to face cross-examination in the court?" Justice Ahsan asked and said that the victim hailed from a village and had never received any education.

The judge further asked whether asked the lawyer if the photos of the child maid which had gone viral after the incident were also fake. At this, the lawyer noted that while the pictures were not fake, the matter had been exaggerated.

Justice Yahya Afridi pointed out that the girl had been recovered from the convicted couple's house and that the convicts’ should accept their mistake even if the bruises were accidental. The lawyer responded that neighbours had some personal disputes with his clients while they allegedly also had links with the magistrate who had recorded the girl’s statement.

This enraged Justice Ahsan who remarked: "Was the whole world against Raja Khurram?"

He said that convict’s claimed that they had taken the victim to a doctor whereas they had no proof of this. The case was adjourned until today.

Teacher promotion

The IHC on Monday sought a reply from respondents in a case regarding promotion rules of teachers associated with the federal government’s educational institutions.

Justice Aamer Farooq of the IHC ordered the respondents to submit para-wise comments by the next hearing of the case.

The bench also summoned Attorney General of Pakistan at the next hearing in this matter.

The petitioners’ counsel pleaded before the court that the new promotion rules directly affected the services of his clients.

The government had issued a promotion notification against 50% higher posts rather than 75%. He argued that the new rules introduced by the government should be applicable for the newly recruited teachers, not those of old cadres, adding that it would be discriminatory to implement these rules on his clients.

The bench served notices to the education ministry, the establishment division, finance division and others. The case was adjourned for an indefinite period.

with additional input from our correspondent 

Published in The Express Tribune, May 7^th, 2019.