ISLAMABAD - Justice Qazi Faez Isa, senior puisne judge of the Supreme Court, on Monday took strong exception to the summoning of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) meeting without informing him.
In a letter addressed to the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial and copied it to the SC Registrar with the direction to print this message and immediately deliver to all the JCP members.
Justice Faez in his letter said, “I learnt, through the media, that two meetings of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) have been called for the 28 and 29 June to consider the nominees to the Sindh High Court (SHC) and of the confirmation of the additional judges of Lahore High Court (LHC). Neither the Chief Justice of Pakistan nor Jawad Paul, the Secretary of the JCP informed me of these meetings.”
He said, “My Private Secretary took photos of the Secretary’s letters which he WhatsApped me, and photos of the accompanying 3 large boxes of documents, presumably containing the particulars of the nominees and specimens of their work.”
Justice Isa maintained, “I take great exception to the manner in which these JCP meetings have been called. And, it has become tiresome to keep repeating the details of the manipulative and illegal conduct of the Secretary. Serious concerns expressed verbally and in writing, about the Secretary remain unaddressed; the courtesy of a reply is not even extended. Is this disdain, arrogance or a flaunting of unaccountability? And, does such conduct strengthen and build institutions or weaken and destroy them?”
He further wrote that when the matters are determined unilaterally, and arbitrarily, and the Secretary cum Registrar is completely unaccountable, one may well question what legitimacy attaches to the Supreme Court taking issue with those who similarly exercise powers in their respective domains?
He penned down 19 reasons for not calling the JCP meetings on June 28 and 29. These meetings could have been held earlier, that is, when the SC was not on vacations. They can be held when vacations are over. Similarly, the SHC and the LHC are also on summer vacations.
He stated that 20 vacancies sought to be filled in did not suddenly occur. They have existed for years. Where lies the sudden need to fill them, and, to do so in such a tearing rush? The tenure of the 13 LHC additional judges was recently extended by 6 months. Why has this matter been brought up again so soon afterwards?
In letter to CJP says it will be appropriate to postpone JCP meetings till SC vacations
Justice Faez further questioned that does special treatment with regard to LHC incumbents not create unnecessary misgivings? Will those in other provinces and of Islamabad not legitimately question this differential treatment? And, will this provide a pretext to those who want to create fissures in the unity of the nation?
He also stated that the reason to extend the tenure of the 13 LHC additional judges was because we did not have the opportunity to examine their documents contained in 2 boxes. Which now have become 4 boxes which we have not had the time to examine.
The SC judge added that is it at all reasonable to presume that JCP members have examined the voluminous documents contained in a box with regard to the nominees of the SHC in a few days? And, those members on sanctioned leave and who are abroad are not given an opportunity to examine them at all.
He wrote that the senior most judge always chairs one of the 2 committees (antecedents and competence). Why has he been denied this responsibility with regard to these nominees?
Justice Isa said that incidentally, I am the only judicial member of the JCP who has lived and practiced in Sindh. Then does it stand to reason to exclude me from consultation with regard to appointments to the SHC? And, is it not insulting that I have not been nominated to chair either of the 2 committees regarding SHC appointments?
He further said that the ugly head of provincialism and ethnicity has raised itself because of the treatment meted out to the Chief Justice of the SHC (by the former CJP). He was bypassed by the then CJP, stating that he was not fit for appointment to the Supreme Court, yet just a few days later the same CJP proposed that he be appointed as an ad hoc judge of the SC. Did he become fit overnight? Or was this done to ridicule and humiliate him? If the CJ of a province is held in such contempt by the head of the institution, then is it justified to punish for contempt those others who belittle judges?
Justice Faez continued that the CJ of the SHC had earlier nominated a different group, including a woman, but he withdrew the names, apparently because of the pressure exerted by those pursuing an ethnic agenda. Having undermined the authority of the CJ of the SHC was this unexpected?
He mentioned that when the matter of the appointment of a female judge to the SC was being considered much was said by those advocating such an appointment, despite the fact that it was pointed out that the total number of female judges in the superior courts would remain the same. Yet those advocating more female judges have so soon turned a blind eye to the fact that there is not a single female amongst the 20 nominees.
He said that no effort was made to contact me and find out where I am, and to arrange for a video-link facility to enable my virtual participation. Is it then wrong to presume that the sole reason for calling these meetings is to ensure that I would not participate?
Justice Isa maintained that therefore, it would be appropriate to postpone the meetings of the JCP till after the SC vacations. This will also give all JCP members the possibility to participate. The letter concluded, “If we must persist in the folly of acting arbitrarily and ensuring packing of courts, then please arrange for a video link facility for me from Spain so I can further record my objections to the illegal convening of these meetings.”
In a letter addressed to the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial and copied it to the SC Registrar with the direction to print this message and immediately deliver to all the JCP members.
Justice Faez in his letter said, “I learnt, through the media, that two meetings of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) have been called for the 28 and 29 June to consider the nominees to the Sindh High Court (SHC) and of the confirmation of the additional judges of Lahore High Court (LHC). Neither the Chief Justice of Pakistan nor Jawad Paul, the Secretary of the JCP informed me of these meetings.”
He said, “My Private Secretary took photos of the Secretary’s letters which he WhatsApped me, and photos of the accompanying 3 large boxes of documents, presumably containing the particulars of the nominees and specimens of their work.”
Justice Isa maintained, “I take great exception to the manner in which these JCP meetings have been called. And, it has become tiresome to keep repeating the details of the manipulative and illegal conduct of the Secretary. Serious concerns expressed verbally and in writing, about the Secretary remain unaddressed; the courtesy of a reply is not even extended. Is this disdain, arrogance or a flaunting of unaccountability? And, does such conduct strengthen and build institutions or weaken and destroy them?”
He further wrote that when the matters are determined unilaterally, and arbitrarily, and the Secretary cum Registrar is completely unaccountable, one may well question what legitimacy attaches to the Supreme Court taking issue with those who similarly exercise powers in their respective domains?
He penned down 19 reasons for not calling the JCP meetings on June 28 and 29. These meetings could have been held earlier, that is, when the SC was not on vacations. They can be held when vacations are over. Similarly, the SHC and the LHC are also on summer vacations.
He stated that 20 vacancies sought to be filled in did not suddenly occur. They have existed for years. Where lies the sudden need to fill them, and, to do so in such a tearing rush? The tenure of the 13 LHC additional judges was recently extended by 6 months. Why has this matter been brought up again so soon afterwards?
In letter to CJP says it will be appropriate to postpone JCP meetings till SC vacations
Justice Faez further questioned that does special treatment with regard to LHC incumbents not create unnecessary misgivings? Will those in other provinces and of Islamabad not legitimately question this differential treatment? And, will this provide a pretext to those who want to create fissures in the unity of the nation?
He also stated that the reason to extend the tenure of the 13 LHC additional judges was because we did not have the opportunity to examine their documents contained in 2 boxes. Which now have become 4 boxes which we have not had the time to examine.
The SC judge added that is it at all reasonable to presume that JCP members have examined the voluminous documents contained in a box with regard to the nominees of the SHC in a few days? And, those members on sanctioned leave and who are abroad are not given an opportunity to examine them at all.
He wrote that the senior most judge always chairs one of the 2 committees (antecedents and competence). Why has he been denied this responsibility with regard to these nominees?
Justice Isa said that incidentally, I am the only judicial member of the JCP who has lived and practiced in Sindh. Then does it stand to reason to exclude me from consultation with regard to appointments to the SHC? And, is it not insulting that I have not been nominated to chair either of the 2 committees regarding SHC appointments?
He further said that the ugly head of provincialism and ethnicity has raised itself because of the treatment meted out to the Chief Justice of the SHC (by the former CJP). He was bypassed by the then CJP, stating that he was not fit for appointment to the Supreme Court, yet just a few days later the same CJP proposed that he be appointed as an ad hoc judge of the SC. Did he become fit overnight? Or was this done to ridicule and humiliate him? If the CJ of a province is held in such contempt by the head of the institution, then is it justified to punish for contempt those others who belittle judges?
Justice Faez continued that the CJ of the SHC had earlier nominated a different group, including a woman, but he withdrew the names, apparently because of the pressure exerted by those pursuing an ethnic agenda. Having undermined the authority of the CJ of the SHC was this unexpected?
He mentioned that when the matter of the appointment of a female judge to the SC was being considered much was said by those advocating such an appointment, despite the fact that it was pointed out that the total number of female judges in the superior courts would remain the same. Yet those advocating more female judges have so soon turned a blind eye to the fact that there is not a single female amongst the 20 nominees.
He said that no effort was made to contact me and find out where I am, and to arrange for a video-link facility to enable my virtual participation. Is it then wrong to presume that the sole reason for calling these meetings is to ensure that I would not participate?
Justice Isa maintained that therefore, it would be appropriate to postpone the meetings of the JCP till after the SC vacations. This will also give all JCP members the possibility to participate. The letter concluded, “If we must persist in the folly of acting arbitrarily and ensuring packing of courts, then please arrange for a video link facility for me from Spain so I can further record my objections to the illegal convening of these meetings.”
