The Islamabad High Court (IHC) declared the registrar’s office report on preventing lawyers from entering the courtroom due to a strike as unsatisfactory, indicating potential contempt of court action against the deputy registrar security.
The court inquired about the law under which bar councils and bar associations go on a strike.
Can bar councils and bar associations stop lawyers from going to court by force? Justice Babar Sattar of the IHC initiated contempt of court proceedings on the petition regarding restraining Naeem Bukhari's lawyer from entering the courtroom to pursue the case.
The Registrar High Court claimed he had not received any complaints about barring lawyers.
However, the court questioned the Deputy Registrar Security, who clarified that the report relied upon was from the police, as the police are responsible for the high court’s security.
Justice Sattar questioned whether the Islamabad police is responsible for the high court security and suggested possible contempt proceedings against the deputy registrar security.
Hasan Raza Pasha, a member of the Pakistan Bar Council, also appeared before the court.
Justice Sattar noted that lawyers had cited the strike as a reason for not appearing in court and had requested assistance from lawyers' organisations in Islamabad.
He expressed dissatisfaction with the conduct of the bar council, particularly during forced strikes.
Pasha refuted allegations of influencing the court with large numbers of lawyers, stating that they were hurt by the perception of coercion. Justice Sattar asked the bar council to submit a written response.
The court adjourned the hearing until July 5, directing the Pakistan Bar Council, Islamabad Bar Council, and bar representatives to provide a detailed reply.
1710998259-0/pti-(1)1710998259-0-270x192.webp "pti goes against imran s decision")
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