ISLAMABAD – SM Zafar, lawyer for PCO judge Justice Sayed Zahid Hussain, on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that all objectives could be achieved through the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) under Article 209, thus the court should not have issued contempt of court notices to PCO judges, adding that the constitution scheme should be respected. He said in the United Kingdom, contempt of court notices be issued to subordinate judges, not to superior courts’ judges.
Zafar said in the verdict announced on July 31, 1972, in the Mujibur Rehman case, it was held that the contempt of court notice could be issued to judges of subordinate judges and common people. The bench, consisting of Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Parvez was hearing contempt of court cases against superior court judges, who had violated an SC seven-member bench’s restraining order of November 3, 2007 by taking oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order.
Justice Siddiqui said PCO judges had not maintained dignity, as they had shown allegiance to a dictator. Zafar said on August 27, 2008, eight judges of the Sindh High Court and on August 30, 2008, five judges of Lahore High Court had taken oath under the Farooq Naik-formula. Citing news reports, he said many leaders of the lawyers’ movement had expressed great regret at that time and had called the reappointment of those deposed judges illegal and unconstitutional.
Justice Tariq Parvez noted that these were political statements and had no constitutional importance. Justice Khilji Arif Hussain asked the lawyer to tell the court what had been stated in the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) judgment. Zafar said the judges who had taken oath initially and later were the same, adding that Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Parvez also fell in the same category.
But justice Khilji said in the SHCBA case, the distinction had been made between judges who had taken oath under PCO and those who were reappointed.
Dr Abdul Basit, lawyer for Justice Hasnat Ahmed Khan and Justice Shabbar Raza Rizvi, complained that applications of his clients would become infractuous if not fixed before the bench, as his objections regarding two judges of the bench had not been removed. The proceedings were adjourned until today (Wednesday).
