Islamabad:
Legal minds are in shock for unprecedented development before the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) where Judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri has been excluded from the list of the next three days.
Although a division bench led by the chief judge Sarfraz Dogar has not yet made the written order in the Jahangiri case of judge Jahangiri, it is reported that the judge was selected from judicial work.
The situation will be clear after placing the written order. However, it is clear from the new list that Judge Jahangiri is not part of a single bench or division for the next three days. It will be interesting to know if the written order will be issued after immense criticism of lawyers.
Legal minds are unanimous that the judge of the Superior Court cannot be retained from judicial work through a judicial order because it will invite anarchy in the judiciary. The former president of the association of the bar of the high court of the Sindh (SHCBA), Salahuddin Ahmed, says that it is difficult to imagine a “more flagrant, illegal or a more obviously” prescription “with a bias.
“Judge Jahangiri was a petitioner at the Supreme Court against the transfer of Chief Dogar to the IHC. The code of conduct of judges and the fundamental judicial ethics dictated that Dogar judge could not sit on a bench hearing the petition against Judge Jahangiri. But he did it,” he said.
Salahuddin also said that the Supreme Court of Gul Taiz Marwat said that a high court bench cannot entertain a request against another bench / judge. It is prohibited by article 199, paragraph 5, of the Constitution and rules of the Judicial Commission. But the bench of chief judgar and judge Azam obviously not read the judgment or article 199. “
He also declared that the Supreme Court of the Iftikhar Chaudhry affair said that a judge cannot be retained from judicial work, which is equivalent to a referral to a judge, who can only be made by the Supreme Judicial Council under section 209 of the Constitution. But this bench has probably not read this judgment either.
Faisal Siddiqi Advocate declared that the virtual suspension of Judge Jahangiri is also unconstitutional and as reckless as a suspension of former chief judge Iftikhar Chaudhry by the general military pervez Musharraf. Dogar chief judge is marching in the footsteps of the dictator. But the responsibility and the burden are found in the chief judge Yahya Afridi-who can stop complete anarchy at the IHC, he added.
The former additional prosecutor Tariq Mahmood Khokhar said that it was a blatant violation of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAd Chaudhry CJP, who ruled unequivocally against “even a temporary interference with the office of a judge …” by any authority, against which a reference is subject “before the SJC.
Waqar Rana Advocate said that he had already been detained in the Iftikhar Chaudhry case that a judge could not be suspended during the procedure accused of poorly with him. Even the ordinance that the SJC is empowered to suspend a judge was declared unconstitutional.
“In a brief of guaranteed quo, no provisional compensation in the form of suspension is granted because this would be equivalent to a final compensation. The suspension order is manifestly illegal, without competence and faith of Mala. The judge must deposit a petition against the order,” adds Rana.
Lawyer Asad Rahim Khan said he had been as clear as the day in Iftikhar Chaudhry against the president of the Pakistani case that even the SJC does not have the power to prevent a judge from fulfilling his functions. And it is in relation to the very constitutional organization responsible for holding responsible judges, what to say of their comrades serving on the same bench.
Khan said that, taking into account this declaration of the law, under which authority can a judge be covered with coverage to support his oath? Judge Jahangiri’s decisions are free to appeal, maintain or cancel, as for any other judge in the superior courts. But to hold it from his duty, in itself, is that a judge acts as if in an exceptional state. Judicial independence has suffered sufficiently, “he said.
Abdul Moiz Jaferi Advocate said: “We were before the High Court of the Sindh to cancel the unjust decision of the Meaning Committee as approved by the Union of the University of Karachi for a year now. We have been in a hurry to explain our Locus Standa, our status in Sue in Tariq Jahangiri in the way. We are two associations with bars.
Hafiz Ehsaan Khokhar said that the recent suspension order concerning an IHC in -office and that the internal differences reported between judges raise serious concerns for the credibility of the judiciary. These unprecedented judicial orders, adopted without the required judicial restraint, are not in the interest of justice or the confidence of citizens.
He stressed that by virtue of article 209 of the Constitution, the right forum to fight against allegations against judges is the SJC. Any action outside this constitutional path undermines judicial independence and regular procedure. The judicial deduction should have been exercised before adopting such an order, because institutional credibility depends on the follow -up of the right constitutional forum.
