–SC judge’s counsel says prior approval of federal cabinet is mandatory before submission of presidential reference
–Demands quashing of reference on the basis of ‘mala fide intent’ by executive authorities
–Justice Isa offers to provide details of surveillance operation against his family members
ISLAMABAD: The counsel for Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Tuesday contented that the government’s initiation of inquiry against the Supreme Court (SC) judge had violated the mandate of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) as only the latter was allowed to probe a sitting judge.
As the full court bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the presidential reference against Justice Isa, Munir A Malik, the counsel for the SC judge, argued that President Dr Arif Alvi should have sent the reference to the federal cabinet for approval before the administration was allowed to investigate the judge.
He contended that this equates to targeting the judiciary, therefore, the reference must be dismissed based on “mala fide intentions”. He also said that SJC should have taken these aspects into consideration before proceedings were initiated on the reference.
SURVEILLANCE OPERATION:
Justice Isa’s counsel also told the court that his client has offered to submit a sealed affidavit explaining how he was aware of his family being under surveillance.
To this, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Anwar Mansoor Khan said that the apex court was not allowed to record evidence under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.
Justice Bandial, however, said that as the petitioner has accused the executive authorities of mala fide intentions, he was now trying to provide evidence for it.
Justice Isa’s counsel said that the government never declared how it gathered information on the SC judge. He added that a private agency based in the United Kingdom (UK) was hired to track Justice Isa’s activities there during the past decade.
“I cannot say what mode of surveillance was employed. Emails could have been hacked, or phones tapped, or the defence attache may have obtained secret information related to the UK properties,” said Malik.
He further said that this was evident from the way the government attached the entire travel history of the judge and his family in its reply to the court.
He argued that the relevant authorities issued notices to his client, seeking declaration of assets and tax returns for the period between 2015 to 2018. He added that the mentioned documents had already been submitted.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar replied that the court cannot establish mala fide intent on the basis of interferences.
Justice Bandial said that the apex judicial body could not simply dismiss a presidential reference against as a judge as it was bound to conduct a proper inquiry.
The counsel then quoted the judgement of the apex court in the case of former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, wherein the top court had dismissed the presidential reference against him on the basis of mala fide intent.
He added that the top court has the power to conduct an ordinary judicial review of the conduct of executive authorities in relation to a reference against a judge. “The SJC’s conduct can be reviewed on the basis of the principles laid down by the top court in the Iftikhar Chaudhry case,” he added.
The court adjourned the hearing of the case till Monday.
It is worth mentioning here that the reference filed against Justice Isa alleges that he acquired three properties in London on lease in the name of his wife and children between 2011 and 2015, but did not disclose them in wealth returns. Justice Isa has contested that claim, saying he is not a beneficial owner of the flats — neither direct nor indirect.
