Contempt of court charges: In absolving Imran, SC cites his overall conduct

Detailed judgment says the PTI chief showed that he had due respect for the court.

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court on Saturday said it was on the basis of the overall conduct of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan that the court dropped the charges of contempt of court against him.

“It was evident from his body language that he holds full respect and regard for the court,” reads the 17-page detailed judgment authored by Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali.

Though Imran Khan never made an official apology before the court despite repeated observations of the apex court judges, the detailed judgment said: “Even, while addressing the court, he (Imran Khan) has shown ‘signs of encountering an unpleasant situation and remorse on his face’ with reference to these proceedings, which have expanded from his one word objectionable remark [sharamnak]...”



The judges explained in the verdict that in their opinion, the submission of an unconditional apology by the alleged contemnor in every case was neither a condition precedent, nor a point of ego or prestige for the courts, “which practice is to be adhered to in each case as a rule of thumb before discharging the notice.”

The judgment said that mere submission of an unconditional apology was also no ground for further inaction in the proceedings or discharge of such notice without looking into the intent behind it.

“Rather, it would entirely depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case, particularly the stance taken by the alleged contemnor qua his overall conduct during such proceedings before the Court.”

The ruling said that when the present case was viewed on the golden principles of forgiveness/remission and pardon, enshrined in Islam, “a prudent judge entrusted with the onerous task of dispensation of justice is supposed to be more composed and cool minded so as to tactfully deal with such pity notions and remarks, which might have been made in good faith or due to a slip of the tongue.”



The judgment said Imran Khan was a public figure and duly elected member of the National Assembly –a person who had not only been actively involved in politics for a considerable period, but was also the chairman of a political party.

“In such circumstances, while considering his conduct, we also cannot lose sight of the provision of Articles 19 and 66 of our Constitution, relating to freedom of speech and the privileges of members of Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament).”

The judgment said the court had also accepted Imran’s explanation that the word ‘sharamnak’ (shameful) was used to refer to the questionable conduct of judicial officers during the general elections 2013 and not the Supreme Court.

However, the judgment warned politicians and celebrities that they were expected to use more decent language and had to be more careful in the selection of words in public gatherings or press conferences.

The court held that when the contempt proceedings were in the nature of quasi criminal proceedings, the benefit of any such doubt in favour of a contemnor was to be extended to him.

It said Imran Khan had promptly responded to the notice at the first instance and had placed his appearance before the court on both the dates of hearing fixed in this matter to show ‘due respect, honour and regard for the court’.

“Earlier also he has filed two statements before the court for explaining the background of his remark, which has been misconstrued and agitated this court for issuing notice under consideration. Subsequent to it, again he has filed a detailed reply to the said notice of contempt proceedings wherein, he has stated the relevant facts honestly and clarified his position in so many words,” reads the judgment.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 20^th, 2013.