Speedy justice remains unheard of
Pakistan doesn’t lag behind when it comes to the strengthening of the judiciary. All thanks to Ex CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry who took judicial activism to the heart so much so that he sent the chief executive of the country home as he refused to adhere to His Lordship’s edict
Judicial activism is a common slogan in most democratic countries. To uphold the trichotomy of power the judiciary must be bold and independent. ‘Free from all bias’.
Be it the House of Lords in the United Kingdom or the US Supreme Court in ‘Roe v Wade’ where it was determined that a Texas law criminalising abortion was unconstitutional, Your Lordships around the globe do not shy away.
Pakistan doesn’t lag behind when it comes to the strengthening of the judiciary. All thanks to Ex CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry who took judicial activism to the heart so much so that he sent the chief executive of the country home as he refused to adhere to His Lordship’s edict. Suo Motto on the Arsalan Iftikhar case followed. Irfan Qadir shouldn’t have been surprised when he saw Chaudhry presiding over the case. Mr Qadir should have understood that the then CJP was the roaring lion of justice and there was no chance whatsoever of any bias even if he was taking up his son’s case. Obviously Article IV of the Code of Conduct for the superior judiciary which states: ‘A Judge must decline resolutely to act in a case involving his own interest, including those of persons whom he regards and treats as near relatives or close friend’ was trivial for Chaudhry.
Justice Jawwad S Khawaja on the other hand refused to recuse himself from taking up cases against Geo/Jang group despite the fact that Mir Shakilur Rehman was his relative. “I don’t find any reasons whatsoever not to sit on the bench” concluded Justice Khawaja while presiding over the Geo case. How convenient of him to decide what is wrong and what is right in general bias alleged against him. A judge with his conscience is capable of deciding for himself. Then why were we startled when Justice CS Karnan of the Madras High Court stayed his very own transfer orders by the Supreme Court of India, he even went on to demand a written statement by the Chief Justice of India. If the ponytailed adjudicator’s observations can be justified then why not Justice Karnan’s? After all maybe his conscience remained unperturbed.
Accountability yet again is still almost unprecedented when it comes to the superior judiciary. The absence of a proper watchdog remains a predicament. Simultaneously the National Accountability Bureau is grilled every other day by the Hon’ble Lordships for not discharging its duties properly against public functionaries
The next thing we will hear is PM Sharif leading a commission probing his family’s involvement in the Panama leaks. As long as his conscience is stimulated what’s the harm?
Talk about Panama leaks, judicial recusal is once again seen to be practiced. Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali declined the federal government’s offer to form a commission. Well and good because there were legal difficulties in its formation. But what about the name of a member of the superior judiciary flashing in the Panama leaks? Not being contemptuous at all but the citizens of Pakistan under its constitution reserve a right to be dispensed justice by a diligent and honest human. The Supreme Judicial Council seems busy taking up references on other grounds.
We do criticise the establishment for not being open about its accountability process but thankfully this presumption was rebutted not long ago when names of senior military officials dismissed from duty were publicised. Starting from the top the general is hell bent on making an example out of not so honest officials. A highly commendable step. A leaf out of the khakis book wouldn’t do much harm I guess.
Reverting to the judiciary it reminds one of JK Rowling’s Harry Potter series where instead of saying the name of Lord Voldemort it was easier to state ‘ He Who Must Not Be Named’. While coining an opinion regarding the judiciary this phrase should be adhered to as a bulwark because you never know when the dark lord may rise up against you.
Neverthless the Hon’ble Judges have a lot on their plate already. CJP Jamali while addressing the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Judicial conference proclaimed that the major reason for the pendency of around 60 per cent cases in superior courts of Pakistan was incompetence, indifference and negative thinking of official institutions, whereas 20 per cent cases were the outcome of dishonesty and egoism of litigants as well as vexatious litigations. There is therefore no irony in the fact that the federal minister for railways is camouflaged behind a stay order granted by the apex court almost a year after he was disqualified by an election tribunal.
‘Justice delayed is Justice denied ‘. Who cares about the common man when the government is granted relief in a matter of days? The signal free corridor case is one example.
Enhancing the original jurisdiction of the apex court is another move often made by the superior judiciary. By taking up new suo mottos, other sub-judice matters remain unsettled. Not to mention relief granted to members of banned organisations amongst others.
By all means the 21st amendment got the nod from the Supreme Court. But is developing a parallel ad-hoc system sufficient for the system to survive in the long run? I think not. The duration specified for the military courts is counting its days. Yet the Judicial system seems unnerved in matters due to which these courts came into being.
It is not to be sidelined that the superior judiciary of Pakistan has indeed contributed to the country’s progression. Doors have indeed been opened for the public. Steps have indeed been constructed in order to be climbed by those who seek justice. Speedy justice however still remains unheard of.
Accountability yet again is still almost unprecedented when it comes to the superior judiciary. The absence of a proper watchdog remains a predicament. Simultaneously the National Accountability Bureau is grilled every other day by the Hon’ble Lordships for not discharging its duties properly against public functionaries. Why not enhance the original jurisdiction of NAB?
This reminds me what Ghalib would say
“Umar Bhar Yahi Bhool Krta Raha Ghalib
Dhool Chehre Par Thi Saaf Aina Karta Raha”