PTI’s inconsistent policy on CJ Isa

The PTI does not have a consistent policy on Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJ) Qazi Faez Isa, who is hearing various cases related to the party and its leaders.

On Thursday, one of the PTI’s counsels, Niazullah Niazi, raised objections to CJ Isa, who was leading a bench hearing the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) petition against the Lahore High Court judgment regarding the appointment of election tribunals. However, another PTI counsel, Salman Akram Raja, who is a respondent in the same case, did not endorse Niazi’s viewpoint.

CJ Isa was visibly annoyed with Niazi’s objections and warned that he would refer the lawyer’s case to the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) for disciplinary action. “This scandalizing must stop. Enough is enough,” said CJ Isa.

This is not the first time a contradiction has been witnessed in the PTI’s policy on the judge. The PTI core committee decided to object to CJ Isa’s presence on the bench hearing the reserved seats case. PTI leader Raoof Hasan expressed his mistrust of CJ Isa in a press conference.

However, Faisal Siddiqi, the counsel for the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC)—a party comprising PTI-backed lawmakers—did not agree with the party. He made it clear that if the PTI wanted to object to the CJ, then he might withdraw his vakalatnama.

Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said objecting to any judge of the Supreme Court is an extraordinary event. “Objecting to a chief justice even more so. It creates friction and rarely works. What’s the point of taking such a risk if your team isn’t even on the same page? It’s an extreme maneuver and it’s wasted. The only loser here is the PTI. If they wanted to embarrass the court as some kind of strategy, they should have put up a united and consistent front. Over here, they just ended up embarrassing themselves,” he added.

The relationship between CJ Isa and the PTI has been tense since the filing of a presidential reference regarding his removal in May 2019, when the party was in power. At that time, there was a cordial relationship between the PTI and the security establishment, and both had made a joint effort to remove Justice Isa. When the relationship between the powers that be and the PTI turned sour after the ouster of the party’s government in April 2021, PTI leaders started saying that filing the presidential reference against Justice Isa was a mistake.

The PTI also supported former CJ Umar Ata Bandial’s camp in judicial politics. When Justice Isa took charge as the CJ in September last year, PTI leaders were hopeful that he would rescue them from persecution at the hands of the establishment.

However, CJ Isa endorsed state institutions’ narrative against the PTI. He also expressed concern over the use of social media for launching campaigns against judges. Justice Isa did not give any major relief to the PTI.

The situation changed after the January 13 order of a bench led by CJ Isa that declared PTI’s intra-party elections illegal. Subsequently, the PTI was deprived of its election symbol.

Later, the party’s legal team was disappointed with the SC’s decision and withdrew a contempt petition filed against the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and the executive authorities for not implementing the court’s order to provide a level playing field to the party during the elections.

It has been witnessed that political parties have generally failed to get relief by raising objections to judges. When the PDM-led government was showing mistrust of former CJ Bandial, the superior bars led by the Independent Group had backed it. However, now the bar led by the same group is fully supporting CJ Isa.

It is noted that several lawyers are not satisfied with the judiciary’s role in recent elections that are marred by allegations of rigging. They are also raising objections to the January 13 order of the SC, due to which the PTI is facing difficulty in getting reserved seats in legislatures, as well as the SC’s decision to suspend its earlier verdict in the military courts case and the arrest of female PTI workers. Currently, CJ Isa is hearing three significant cases related to elections.

Somehow, the PTI needs to understand that the judiciary is the only institution which can redress its grievances. When the PTI’s relationship was cordial with the security establishment, the superior courts were giving it relief. Now, the relationship between the establishment and the PTI is tense, and the party is finding it difficult to get decisions in its favor.

PTI leaders are showing mistrust of CJ Isa, but he is consistent and did not try to alter the perception of being biased toward the PTI.