Presidential references: CJP forms seven-judge bench to hear Justice Isa petition

Justice Umar Ata Bandial-led bench will hear the case on September 17

ISLAMABAD: In a significant development, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa has constituted a seven-judge Supreme Court bench to hear Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s petition against a presidential reference seeking his removal over his alleged non-disclosure of assets.

The bench, led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, will hear the case on September 17.

Other members of the bench are Justice Maqbool Baqar, Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Faisal Arab, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel.

The SC’s three senior most judges including the CJP are part of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) which is hearing the presidential references against Justice Isa and the members included in the larger bench formed on Thursday come next in seniority after these three judges.

Justice Isa to head SC’s bench 4 from Sept 11

Four members of the bench belong to Punjab, two to Sindh while one judge belongs to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (K-P).  It is learnt that the other petitioners, who moved the court against the reference, may seek recusal of two judges who will be the beneficiaries of Justice Isa’s removal.

One of them will become CJP for six months while other judge’s tenure as the top judge will be extended.  "We will raise objection to inclusion of these two judges in the larger bench,” said a senior bar representative on condition of anonymity.

However, bars have expressed satisfaction over Justice Bandial, the head of the bench. Interestingly, Justice Isa has yet to nominate counsel to plead his case.  Renowned lawyer Muneer A Malik may appear on his behalf. Under the law, there is no restriction on a petitioner judge to argue his case.

The CJP has not entertained Justice Isa’s plea for constitution of full-court to hear his case.

Justice Isa had requested that the case be heard by a full-court comprising all the eligible judges of this court since the matter pertains to references against a Supreme Court judge and as per precedent of this court in the case of the CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry v President of Pakistan, PLD 2010 Supreme Court 61.

He said matters narrated in accompanying civil miscellaneous application dated August 26 – “which may for the sake of brevity be read as a part hereof” – demonstrates necessity for hearing by such full-court.

“The petition also raises a number of important constitutional questions, including that of the independence of the judiciary, the formation of an independent opinion by the president, obtaining federal cabinet’s approval and other vital issues of surveillance, and the manner and method of collecting evidence against a judge of the Supreme Court and his family,” he said in his application.

Different superior bars including the Supreme Court Bar Association and the Pakistan Bar Council had also challenged the references filed against Justice Isa, contending that they are motivated by the judge’s verdict in Faizabad sit-in case. Seven petitions have so far been entertained against the references.

Since filing of the presidential reference against Justice Isa in May this year, he was on leave. Now Justice Isa has once again joined his duty and heading a bench.

Justice Isa accuses CJP Khosa of being 'biased against him'

Last month, Justice Isa in a petition had accused the country’s top judge Asif Saeed Khosa of being biased against him. Likewise, he requested the SC to declare that the Supreme Judicial Council’s (SJC) chairman and members are no longer competent to hear the presidential reference against him.

“The language used by the chief justice [of Pakistan] in the [Supreme Judicial] Council’s order sadly demonstrates his lordship’s bias and prejudice towards him [Justice Isa],” the plea stated.

Justice Isa also claimed that intelligence agencies were deployed to monitor his family in which public funds were also misused. Moreover, he alleged that his wife’s personal data and records were also probed. Legal experts believe that the main question before the SC will be allowing state agencies to collect information of judges and their family without approval of competent authority.