The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) has sought an affidavit from a complainant who moved a complaint of misconduct against a Supreme Court judge on several charges.
SJC Secretary Ishrat Ali, who is also the Supreme Court registrar, has written a letter to complainant Advocate Mian Dawood wherein it is stated: "Your complaint dated 23.2.2023 is referred. In compliance with requirements of Section 5 (3) of the SJC Procedure of Enquiry Rules 2005, I am directed to require you to file your affidavit in support of the allegations made in the complaint."
It is learnt that the complainant will submit the affidavit in the current week.
Meanwhile, the SJC also sought a certified copy of the resolution from the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) wherein it was resolved that the complaint would be filed against the SC judge.
All provincial bars had also resolved to move a complaint of misconduct against the SC judge.
However, it was learnt that the bars, wherein Professional Lawyers Group was dominant, were reluctant to file complaints. The same group was also close to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). On the other hand, the bars, wherein Independent Lawyers Group was in majority, were filing complaints against the SC judge. This group was supporting the incumbent PDM government since April last year.
One member of the SJC, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Qaiser Rashid, was retiring on March 30. The new LHC Chief Justice, Muhammad Ameer Bhatti, will replace him as member of the council.
According to Section 7 of the SJC Inquiry of SJC Procedure of Enquiry Rules 2005, “once any information in respect of enquiry into the conduct of a judge is received by any member or the council, it shall be presented to the chairman of the council, who; shall (a) refer the same to any member of the council to look into the said information; and to express his opinion in relation to sufficiency or otherwise of the information; (b) if the council is satisfied that the information prima facie discloses sufficient material for an enquiry, it shall proceed to consider the same”.
It added, “(2) The member, to whom the chairman has referred the information, will examine the same and ascertain if the information so received discloses specific particulars of misconduct, and provides factual details necessary to form prima facie opinion in respect of the guilt of the judge.
“(3) If the member forms an opinion that the information does reveal sufficient material to commence enquiry, he shall inform the council accordingly and the information shall be placed before the council.
“(4) If the member comes to a conclusion that the information is false, frivolous, concocted or untrue, he shall inform the council accordingly and may recommend action against the person who initiated the information.”
Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial being chairman of the SJC might seek an opinion from Justice Qazi Faez Isa or Justice Sardar Tariq Masood over these complaints against the SC judge. So far four complaints had been filed in the SJC against the SC judge. However, CJP Bandial expressed displeasure over the audio/video leaks related to judges.
The SJC initiated the process regarding verification of the complaint against the SC judge.
Section 5 (3) of SJC Procedure of Enquiry Rules 2005 says that the person providing the said information shall identify himself properly.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ