After the Pakistan Bar Council and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) has also moved the Supreme Court against a presidential reference filed against Justice Faez Isa, termed the reference an “attempt to subjugate the judiciary”.
According to a plea filed in the apex court by lawyer Rasheed A Rizvi, the independence of the superior judiciary is of utmost importance.
“The independence of judges is protected from both likely encroachments by the executive as well as their peers and seniors including members of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC),” it added.
It said the ‘so-called complaint’ and information against Justice Isa clearly points towards covert and unauthorised surveillance or investigation.
“Allowing state agencies and functionaries to covertly surveil and investigate superior court judges and their families (without the aforesaid approval) amounts to granting them a licence to blackmail and pressurise judges and is inimical to the independence of the judiciary,” said the petition.
It is pertinent to mention here that the PBC and SCBA have already moved petitions challenging presidential reference against Justice Isa.
“The said reference is primarily motivated by his authorship of the Faizabad judgment which has aroused great resentment on part of the ruling parties and within the visible and invisible branches of the government/establishment,” the petition stated.
Further, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa’s article stating that the final frontier of judicial independence was where the independence of judiciary had to be protected not against any external threats but “from the threats originating from within the judiciary itself” has also been referenced in the petition.
In its petition filed on Thursday, the SHCBA said that it fully backed Khosa’s stance on the matter while emphasising that “the reference is dripping with malice and is patently a colourable exercise of power aimed at punishing Justice Isa for the Faizabad judgment. If it succeeded, it would have devastating consequences for the independence of the judiciary and would teach future generations of judges that there are certain areas and certain quarters within the government that are not (regardless of the law and Constitution) amenable to criticism or correction”.
“The manner in which the reference against Justice Isa had proceeded appeared discriminatory and in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution and had created an impression of bias,” the petition concludes.
