Justice Isa objects to issuing Feb 11 order to media

Asks why SC verdict barring him from hearing PM’s cases shared with press before being sent to him

ISLAMABAD:

Justice Qazi Faez Isa has expressed “shock” over release of the apex court’s Thursday order – barring him from hearing cases against Prime Minister Imran Khan – to the media before being shared with him and has sought explanation from the Supreme Court’s registrar.

While disposing of a case initiated on basis of news reports about Prime Minister Imran Khan planning to issue development grants to lawmakers, a five-judge larger bench on February 11 ruled that Justice Isa should not hear cases involving PM Imran in order “to uphold principle of un-biasness and impartiality.”

The five-page verdict, authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed, noted that Justice Isa has already filed a petition against the prime minister in his personal capacity.

“Therefore, to uphold the principle of un-biasness and impartiality, it would be in the interest of justice that the Honorable Judge [Isa] should not hear matters involving the Prime Minister of Pakistan,” said the order, described as unprecedented by some experts.

Justice Isa, who was part of the larger bench that heard the lawmakers funding case, has, however, written a letter to Supreme Court Registrar Khawaja Daud, stating that the order was passed and released to the media before being sent to him.

“This is shocking since as yet I have not received the file with order/judgment,” he wrote.

The judge said it is a settled practice that after the judge heading a bench writes an order, he sends it to the next senior judge and so on. “However, Justice Ijazul Ahsan [who is junior to Justice Isa] apparently received the order but I [Justice Isa] did not. And the world knows of it before I have seen it,” he added.

In the letter, Justice Isa raised five questions to the apex court registrar.

The judge – who is in line to become the 29th chief justice of Pakistan in September 2023 – asked the official why the court order was not sent to him and why the settled practice of sending it to the next senior judge was not followed.

He asked how the judgment was released to the media before he read it let alone sign it in agreement or disagreement. The judge also asked the registrar why the judgment was released to the media. He also directed the official to provide him the case file so that he could “finally read the judgment”.

According to sources, Justice Isa will not sit in any bench next week and has opted to work from his chamber. They said the judge has also sent copies of his letter to other members of the bench that heard the lawmakers’ funds case.

Commenting on the matter, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) former president Kamran Murtaza said the judiciary's image has been severely damaged. “Lawyers will always stand with Justice Isa,” he added. Another senior lawyer said whatever happened in the development fund case is unprecedented.

“It has never happened in the past that one judge is passing comments against a fellow during the hearing. Subsequently, the same judge reveals that order was not shared with him before being released to the media,” he said on condition of anonymity.

The lawyer also questioned the conduct of Justice Isa, adding that while being part of a bench, he should control his emotions. “Retired judges, who are neutral, should play their role to end tension between majority judges and Justice Isa,” he added.

Prime Minister Imran Khan’s government in June 2019 filed a presidential reference against Justice Isa over the judge’s failure to mention his family members’ foreign properties in his wealth statement.

A ten-judge full court on June 19, 2020 quashed the reference while hearing a slew of petitions including one filed by Justice Isa. However, in the split verdict, the court directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to start proceedings against the judge’s family members under the tax law.

In December 2020, Sarina Isa – the wife of Justice Isa – requested the Supreme Court to remove Imran Khan from the office of the prime minister over the alleged non-disclosure of assets and tax cheat.

Sarina, who also filed a review petition against the SC’s June 19 majority judgment, submitted a long list of charges, alleging that PM Imran is a tax cheat; did not disclose his children’s assets when they were minors in his returns and illegally accessed Justice Isa’s family member’s legally protected records.

The petitioners, including Justice Isa and his wife, also requested that their review petitions should be heard by the same full-court rather than the six judges who issued the majority verdict.

On December 10 2020, a six-judge larger bench, led by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, reserved its decision on the pleas to include the remaining judges in the bench. The order is still awaited.