Dr Aafia case: IHC issues contempt notice to PM, cabinet
A single bench of Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, on Monday, hearing Siddiqui's petition, issued the notices against the prime minister and members of the federal cabinet over the government's failure to submit a report in the Dr Aafia Siddiqui case.
Justice Ejaz expressed strong displeasure over the government for not submitting the required report about why the government was refusing to sign an amicus brief on Aafia case.
He noted in his written order, 'The government has not reverted with the reasons despite being directed to do so, it is in contempt, leaving me with no option but to issue a notice of contempt to the Federal Government.'
The IHC office is directed to initiate a contempt petition accordingly, in which all the members of the federal government will be respondents. The replies of all the Ministers, including the Prime Minister, shall be filed within two weeks from today (July 21).
Justice Ejaz stated that ever since the demolition squad was catapulted into this High Court after the 26th Constitutional Amendment, they have seen one heresy after another hurled at the edifice of justice, maiming it repeatedly, and bringing it almost to its last breaths.
'This is yet another instance. The heresy I speak of now is besieging the dispensation of Justice by a Judge of the High Court by the device of the 'weekly roster' controlled by the office of the Chief Justice. It is both heart-rending and amusing at the same time, a blend of paradox that this High Court has become,' said the judge.
Justice Ejaz mentioned that he had passed the previous order giving the government time to revert with its decision, while cautioning the Additional Advocate General that inaction would leave him no choice but to proceed in contempt. The government filed an appeal before the Supreme Court against his earlier decision permitting amendments to the petition for continuation of this case.
He stated that for whatever reason, the government's case had not been taken up by the Supreme Court. The machinations of the executive appeared elsewhere, in the form of controlling the proceedings of this Court through its roster. 'The legal historians would write that now, even if he wishes to by reason of imperatives of urgent justice, a judge is now not allowed to hold Court by the High Court establishment when he is on leave,' added the judge.
He pointed out that his leave was meant to start today and the roster of judges sitting for this week therefore did not include his name. 'The leave schedule was announced much earlier to the date on which I had ordered to list this case today, given its importance and the need for swift dispensation of justice in this and the other eases that ordered for listing today.'
The judge also said that on Thursday or perhaps Friday, he was informed through his PS by the Office that the cause list will not be issued unless the roster of the sitting judges for this week was amended with the leave of the Chief Justice. That seemed to me a trivial matter and he asked his PS to move an application accordingly.
He further said that he was informed on Saturday that the application was duly moved but the file remained on the table of the Chief Justice, who did not find even 30 seconds to sign it.
He maintained, 'Whether that was by design or oversight, I cannot say for sure, but given the manner in which the roster of judges has been used as a tool for the desired outcome in specific cases, and given the government's stiff opposition to do what is right and to stand by the daughter of the nation at the critical juncture of the Motion before a US Court, I may be forgiven for thinking that it was the former. The correct legal position is that the Office cannot use the shoulder of the Chief Justice in the exercise of administrative powers to obstruct judicial proceedings ordered by a Judge in an ongoing case.'
Justice Ejaz stated that the motivation of a Judge to hold Court on a day on which he is 'officially' on leave would spell out whether the reason to hold Court was any ulterior motive or the dispensation of justice. 'I trust that all right thinking men and women would agree with me that today my decision to hold Court was solely and exclusively for the purposes of dispensation of justice. Gone are the days when a Judge could pass an order even while playing Golf or dining with his family if the exigency so required. The ceremony of robes and a Courtroom – or the menial triviality of a cause list as in this case – were never the indispensable prerequisites for him to carry out judicial business.
He said this is yet another instance of the reproachable use of the administrative power to shackle the exercise of independent judicial authority, with the likely motivation to pend (until my leave ends) the government's response with reasons as to why it would not sign the amicus brief. However, the imperatives of justice shall not be defeated by such petty means. 'To the extent I can, I will exercise my judicial authority to the end of upholding the dignity of the High Court and the justice it dispenses.'
Later, the bench deferred hearing of the case until September 1.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
17 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Thousands join pro-Palestinian march over Sydney Harbour Bridge
SYDNEY: Thousands of demonstrators braved pouring rain to march across Sydney's iconic Harbour Bridge on Sunday calling for peace and aid deliveries in the war-torn Gaza Strip, where a humanitarian crisis has been worsening. Nearly two years into a war that Palestinian authorities say has killed more than 60,000 people in Gaza, governments and humanitarian organisations say a shortage of food is leading to widespread starvation. Some of those attending the march, called by its organizers the 'March for Humanity', carried pots and pans as symbols of the hunger. Among the marchers was Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. New South Wales police and the state's premier last week tried to block the march from taking place on the bridge, a city landmark and transport thoroughfare, saying the route could cause safety hazards and transport disruption. US to refuse visas to Palestinian Authority officials The state's Supreme Court ruled on Saturday that it could go ahead. New South Wales police said they were deploying hundreds of personnel and urged marchers to remain peaceful. Police were also present in Melbourne, where a similar protest march was taking place. Diplomatic pressure ramped up on Israel in recent weeks. France and Canada have said they will recognise a Palestinian state, and Britain says it will follow suit unless Israel addresses the humanitarian crisis and reaches a ceasefire. Israel has condemned these decisions as rewarding Hamas, the group that governs Gaza and whose attack on Israel in October 2023 began an Israeli offensive that has flattened much of the enclave. Australia's centre-left Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said he supports a two-state solution and Israel's denial of aid and killing of civilians 'cannot be defended or ignored', but has not recognised Palestine.
Express Tribune
20 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Govt mulls federal constitutional court
Listen to article Since the passage of the 26th Constitutional Amendment in October last year, the PML-N led federal government has remained largely successful in getting its way in courts. The most significant event is the award of convictions to 204 individuals — belonging to the PTI — in May 9 rioting cases. Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi has played a key role in expeditious trials in May 9 cases. In April, a bench led by him gave four months' deadline to anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) to complete the trials. Similarly, the Supreme Court's Constitutional Bench, which was formed by virtue of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, has also endorsed the trials of 103 May 9 rioters by military courts. Majority of convicts including PTI founder Imran Khan's nephew are behind the bar, waiting for passage of a proposed legislation for getting the right of appeal against their convictions by military courts. Despite the completion of a 45-day deadline, the government has not taken any step to give the right of appeal against military courts' decisions. The constitutional bench is also not sitting due to summer vacations. Three detailed judgements in crucial cases — related reserved seats, transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and military courts — are awaited. On the other hand, the government is waiting for an appropriate time to bring the 27th Constitutional Amendment. A senior government functionary admitted that the creation of a federal constitutional court is under serious consideration. Judiciary role since May 9, 2023 The judiciary's role has been vital amid the ongoing confrontation between the security establishment and the PTI, a confrontation that started after the ouster of the PTI government in April 2022. However, the establishment got disappointed, when a bench led by ex-chief justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial took up a matter related to the arrest of PTI chief Imran Khan on May 9, 2023 and directed the law enforcement agencies to present him in the court. Subsequently, the court gave relief to Imran which further upset the executive functionaries. Ex-CJP Bandial was keen to hold general elections of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies within the 90-day period but he could not do so due to various reasons. The former PML-N led government had issued notification regarding the appointment of Justice Qazi Faez Isa as the next CJP months before the retirement of Justice Bandial. After his taking charge of the SC, Justice Isa did not disappoint the present government in any important matter. Ex-CJP Isa did not take notice of the allegations of human rights violation as well as election rigging. During his term, judgment declaring civilian trials in military courts as unconstitutional was suspended, the PTI was deprived of its election symbol ahead of the February 8 election, the party's female workers and leaders could not get bail and Imran was convicted in three cases during his jail trials. Despite all these happenings, the February 8 election results were shocking for anti-PTI elements. Ex-CJP Isa was considered a "guarantor of system" which was formed after the elections. When some judges raised concerns about agencies' interference in judicial functions, Justice Isa did not back them. Lawyers believe that Justice Isa's biggest step to facilitate the executive was the elevation of ex-Lahore High Court chief justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan to the apex court. The present government was very uncomfortable with Justice Khan on account of his bold steps to ensure fairness in litigations related to election disputes and the May 9 cases. Ex-LHC CJ was the biggest hurdle in the manipulation of trials in the May 9 matters. Soon after his elevation to the SC, different ATCs judges were transferred to the satisfaction of the executive. After six IHC judges wrote a letter to Justice Isa in March last year, the executive started working on a plan to control the superior judiciary. One section of judges had made an attempt to secure the independence of judiciary by giving July 12, 2024 decision in the reserved seats case but they could not succeed. Post 26th amendment judiciary Instead of getting united for the independence of the institution, SC judges are visibly divided into two camps. The beneficiaries of constitutional amendment in the judiciary did not disappoint the present government in any issue. The executive is completely comfortable with all high courts as well as the apex court. Majority of dissenting judges have been sidelined and not included in the constitutional bench. Even the judges who were not in the good books of the executive have been sidelined in the IHC. The government's plan has also been successful in the IHC wherein they transferred three judges from other high courts. Subsequently, Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar became the IHC CJ as per the government's plan. It is being witnessed that the executive has total dominance in the process of superior courts judges' appointment after 26th Constitutional Amendment. Post 26th amendment, the PTI could not get any substantive relief in any matter. Now questions are being raised about convictions in May 9 cases. It is learnt that two senior PTI leaders recently met CJP Yahya Afridi to express apprehensions over non adherence of Article 10-A of the Constitution during the trials. There is a strong perception that "excessive and unjustified" sentences are awarded to the majority of PTI activists and lawmakers. Now all eyes are now on the LHC, which will hear the appeals against the convictions. Generally, convicts have to surrender to court before filing appeals against their convictions. One of PTI legal team members revealed that they are considering alternate strategies to plead the case against convictions. Despite passage of several months, Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi's petitions for the suspension of sentences in the 190 million pounds case have not been decided by the IHC. It will be interesting to see which LHC bench is assigned the task to hear appeals against convictions. Lawyers fear that if the situation remains the same and the convictions are awarded without adherence to due process then people will lose complete trust in the judiciary and the ultimate loser will be the justice system. The judges, who are on the driving seat in the superior judiciary, must evolve a mechanism to end the perception that post 26 amendment judiciary is working under executive influence.
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
Illegal recruitment case: IHC turns down post-arrest bail plea of PARC chief, director
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Friday, turned down post-arrest bail petition of Pakistan Agriculture and Research Council (PARC) Chairman Dr Ghulam Muhammad Ali and Director Establishment Muhammad Akhlaq Malik in illegal recruitment case. A single bench of IHC comprising Justice Muhammad Asif announced the verdict which it had reserved earlier after hearing the arguments of lawyers, Jan Muhammad and Noman Paracha, who appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while Assistant Attorney General Shaista Tabassum represented the federation. The lawyer and legal adviser of the complainant, the Federal Ministry of National Food Security was also in attendance. During the hearing, the petitioner's lawyer said that a regular advertisement for recruitment in PARC was given; the chairman of the council had the authority to increase or decrease the posts of the recruitment. According to the law, he argued that it is an authority and cannot be called corruption or corrupt practice. He added that the 19 accused are named in the case and 17 are on interim bail, only two are arrested. The FIA investigator told the court that the chairman has the authority to increase the posts but he had to give an advertisement. They said the Ministry of Food Security has filed a complaint. They alleged that nepotism was used in recruitment, someone's daughter and someone's niece were recruited and the recruits themselves are giving statements that the entire process was based on malice. Justice Muhammad Asif said the Chairman of the Council was given the Star of Distinction, now a case has been registered against him. The investigation officer said that 'if he has received the Star of Distinction, it does not mean that he can do whatever he wants.' He informed the court that a gentleman also interviewed his daughter himself and got recruited, a person's son and daughter-in-law were also recruited, these are the people who are recognised. The petitioner's lawyer said the problem they have with the recruitment is that their people were not recruited. Justice Muhammad Asif inquired how many relatives have been recruited. The lawyer of the Ministry of Food Security said that 72 servants and relatives from Sahiwal and Sargodha were recruited and there is a statement of one person Shahbaz that he gave Rs25 lakh to the chairman to get the job. After the arguments were completed, the court reserved its decision on the post-arrest bail applications and now announced the same by dismissing the bail petitions. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
