After wedge among judges, SCBA also split

10 of 17 members differ with association’s president, secy

ISLAMABAD:

After the differences seen among Supreme Court judges, a body representing lawyers is also split in the ongoing judicial politics.

The representatives of the Professional Group, which is known to be pro-PTI, are backing the SC judges led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial.

However, the Independent Group, which is known to be pro-Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM), is supporting the other section of the SC judges, led by Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

It is being witnessed that judicial politics has already turned into a civil war, wherein both sides are taking every step to achieve supremacy.

Even rules, procedures, law, etc are not being followed.

The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) – the apex regularity body of lawyers -- led by the Independent Group is demanding the constitution of a full court to hear the case pertaining to the elections. Interestingly, both groups were united against the PTI government when it moved a presidential reference for the removal of Justice Isa.

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has again come to the surface, when 10 out of 17 members of its executive body expressed serious reservations over the statement issued by their president Abid Zuberi and secretary to express solidarity with the CJP's stance as well as against the National Assembly’s resolution against a top court three-judge bench’s decision to hold the elections in Punjab on May 14.

“We, the majority of executive committee members of SCBAP [Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan] (10 out of 17), regret, and express our serious reservations on a non-representative statement of [the] president and secretary, without taking into confidence the majority [of the members]. We express that they have not only tried to deepen the differences among SC judges but also tried to attack the supremacy of parliament, which can never be approved by the majority of executive [committee members],” read a statement issued by 10 SCBA members, disowning the views of the president and secretary of the bar.

These 10 members belong to the Independent Group.

They further demanded that CJP Bandial should immediately call a full court meeting to patch up all the differences between judges, being the head of the institution.

The 10 members added that the top judge should also constitute a full court bench to rectify all dissenting decisions to maintain the trust of the public at large as well as all the stakeholders.

They also warned the SCBA president and secretary that they should not act as spokespersons for a political party, and work for the welfare of the bar as well as for the supremacy of the Constitution instead.

Earlier, the SCBA president and secretary issued a statement, wherein they took serious exception to the “blatantly illegal resolution” passed by the NA on April 6 against the SC’s three-judge bench that ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to hold polls in Punjab on May 14.

“It is unfortunate that the National Assembly which is bound to act in accordance with the Constitution, has blatantly disregarded Article 68…which prohibits any discussions in the parliament with respect to conduct of any judge of the Supreme Court or a high court in discharge of his duties,” the statement issued by the SCBA president and secretary read.

“Whereas members of parliament have made disparaging and extremely disrespectful comments against members of the judiciary which is not only violative of the Constitution but a direct challenge to the integrity of the judiciary,” it added.

It further stated that the resolution would lead to absolute chaos and anarchy when stability and a democratically elected government are the need of the hour.

The NA on April 6 adopted a resolution declaring that the parliament rejected the SC’s April 4 “minority” judgment in connection with holding polls in Punjab on May 14.

The resolution asked the prime minister and the federal cabinet not to implement the decision while urging the top court to form a full court to review the “rewriting” of the Constitution under Article 63-A.

It also expressed concern about the “undue judicial interference” in political matters.

It maintained that the recent judgment of the apex court was creating political instability in the country and paving the way for division of the federating units.

In another statement, the SCBA condemned the alleged smear campaign launched against some SC judges.

It also condemned the “derogatory” remarks and statements passed against these judges at public rallies, congregations and parliament.

“Without any stretch of imagination, it is obvious that the purpose of the said smear campaign is to pressure the judiciary so as to achieve an unconstitutional and undemocratic agenda,” the statement read.

“The SCBA will continue to lend its unwavering support towards upholding the rule of law, independence of institutions and supremacy of the Constitution of Pakistan,” it added.

The SCBA urged all stakeholders to amicably reach a consensus to safeguard the integrity of the judiciary and to restore the political as well as economic stability in the country.

In yet another press statement, the SCBA described a complaint filed to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against CJP Bandial as “blatantly illegal” and “yet another attempt to subvert the Constitution.”

The complaint, filed by lawyer Raja Sibtain Khan, alleged that the CJP engaged in misconduct by dividing judges into groups and securing their support to influence the outcome of a case.

The complaint claims that the actions of the CJP, while hearing a suo motu case in connection with the postponement of the polls in Punjab, violated the Constitution and the fundamental rights of the people of Pakistan.

It added that the top judge’s actions amounted to unfaithfulness and disloyalty to the State.

The complainant called for an investigation into the matter while demanding the removal of the CJP from his post.

Commenting on the complaint, the SCBA said it was clear that the reference against the CJP was yet another attempt to delay the elections in Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa.

“[Any delay in elections will, however, be] in blatant violation of Article 224 (2) of the Constitution and the orders of the SC in SMC No 01/2023 and CP No 05/2023 dated March 1, 2023 and April 4, 2023 respectively,” it added.