Contempt plea moved against two apex court judges

A petitioner has approached the Supreme Court, seeking contempt of court proceedings against two senior SC judges – Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood— for not abiding by a larger bench’s order with regard to a law that seeks to clip wings of the chief justice of Pakistan (CJP).

Justice Isa and Justice Masood were part of a nine-member larger bench that on June 22 took up the petitions filed against trial of civilians in military courts.

However, the two judges refused to hear the petitions, stating that the SC must first decide the fate of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 that makes it mandatory for the CJP to consult SC’s senior-most judges before exercising the SC’s original jurisdiction.

In an unprecedented move, an eight-member larger bench of the Supreme Court on April 17 suspended a proposed piece of legislation that aimed at streamlining discretionary powers of the CJP. The bill, however, became an act of parliament on April 21.

Justice Isa—who has already been notified as the next CJP—on June 22 took strong exception to the SC’s April 13 order, observing that a law could either be upheld or rejected but could not be suspended.

Read In unprecedented move, Justice Isa notified as next CJ

The SC’s senior puisne judge had remarked that he did not consider the nine-member bench hearing petitions against trial of civilians in military courts as a bench. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood had agreed with Justice Isa.

Referring to the refusal of the two judges to accept the SC’s April 13 order, a petitioner—Shahid Rana Advocate—on Monday moved a constitution petition in the apex court seeking contempt proceedings against them.

He contended that the SC larger bench’s order binds the apex court and all its judges.

“But the respondents number 1 and 2 (Justice Isa and Justice Masood) refused to abide by the order in hearing of the constitutional petitions regarding the cases of civilians in military courts and [thus] they are liable to be punished…”

The petitioner contended that the SC’s April 13 order is still in force and denial of the judges to abide by the order while hearing petitions filed against trial of civilians in military courts is a “clear cut” contempt of court.

Read more Divided we stand: Supreme Court judges still poles apart

“Already there are many questions on the existence and operation of the judicial system of Pakistan at national and international level and wording used by the respondents on June 22 telecast and printed in the media and circulated worldwide is enough to proceed with the contempt petition."

The petitioner said contempt is a crime against the state and the contemnors cannot be set at liberty to sabotage peace of the country.

“Even otherwise the (April 13) order is as per mandate of the Constitution because the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 is in violation of Article 239 of the Constitution.

“This court could also take suo motu notice of the contempt against the respondents when the respondents refused to sit in the aforementioned bench of this court on June 22.”

The petitioner requested the court to summon the respondents and bring them to book.