Presidential immunity clause: Justice Ramday playing politics, alleges Aitzaz

Premier’s counsel says president need not seek immunity from court, as implied by NRO judgment author.

LAHORE:

The face of the lawyers movement in 2007, Aitzaz Ahsan, scathingly dismissed on Monday Justice (retd) Khalilur Rehman Ramday’s public statements on the presidential immunity issue, in a rare statement against a member of the judiciary. 

Referring to the retired judge’s statements on a private television on Sunday, the prime minister’s counsel in the Supreme Court contempt notice case said that if Ramday wanted to play politics, he should do so “openly”.  Ahsan was speaking to journalists outside the Lahore High Court (LHC) premises.

“I respect Mr Ramday, but I feel sorry for him. He is the author of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) judgment. He has put his honour at stake. He should have not spoken on a sub-judice (currently under trial) matter,” Ahsan said, pointing out that the mandatory two-year embargo on making public statements after the judge’s retirement had not yet ended.

On Sunday, Justice (retd) Ramday had stated that whoever wants immunity should come to court to seek it, and couldn’t presume it while sitting at home. The retired judge held that, “People who are thinking like this should imagine that if such things are allowed then dacoits, murderers, gang rapists will also think after the crime that they are immune”.

Even more controversially, Ramday added it would be a ‘blessing in disguise for the nation’ that the SC will interpret Article 248 (referring to presidential immunity) which is being sought after two years and two months.

Ahsan’s response was: “Ramday had started to answer, one-sidedly, what I was supposed to argue in the court”. Referring to a controversial case presided over by Justice Ramday in the past on illegal multi-storey buildings in Lahore, he said “the buildings in Lahore are still witness to Ramday’s one-sided decisions”.

Ahsan pointedly dismissed Ramday’s opinion, saying the president did not need to approach a court to seek immunity, adding that the prime minister never committed contempt of court by not writing a letter to the Swiss courts.

Drawing an audacious parallel, he said that if someone moved a petition against the Chief Justice (CJ) of Pakistan or the CJ of the LHC, the registrar offices of both courts would not accept such petitions because cases cannot be filed against chief justices. In such a case, the CJs would not approach courts to seek immunity, he said, adding that likewise, the president did not need to move the court for immunity.

On the issue of writing letters to the Swiss government, he said: “it’s irrelevant as the president enjoys complete immunity in Pakistan and Switzerland,” reiterating that a letter could only be written after the expiry of the president’s tenure.

Referring to the time he opposed former president Pervez Musharraf’s immunity plea before the SC under Article 248, Aitzaz made it clear that, back then, the case in question entailed civil proceedings, unlike President Asif Ali Zardari, who is facing criminal proceedings.

Aitzaz’s criticism of Ramday, however, doesn’t mean he’s given up his strict stance on respecting the role of the judiciary. Responding to a question, he said he became the prime minister’s counsel on certain conditions. “I have asked the prime minister [to ensure] that government officials stop spewing venom against the Supreme Court. And the prime minister will not go to the SC by leading a political procession,” he said – adding both conditions had been honoured so far.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 24^th, 2012.