Judge Sardar Ejaz Ishaq of the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) expressed his dissatisfaction on Wednesday for a case of contempt, in relation to the denial of the meeting of former Prime Minister Imran Khan with his lawyer, being transferred to a larger bank and initiated contempt procedures against the move.
The IHC Administration had yesterday constituted a larger bank of three members, headed by the newly appointed President of the Interim Justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar, to listen to the 26 requests related to the visiting rights and the conditions of the Imran prison.
As orders were not followed in one of those requests, Imran’s lawyer, Mashal Yousufzai, looked for contempt proceedings against the Superintendent of the Adial prison, Abdul Ghafoor Anjum. The case was heard last week by Judge Ishaq.
However, the list of causes for the case chaired by Judge Ishaq, which will resume on March 21, was canceled by the IHC Registrar office due to the largest bank formation, arose during an hearing today.
Yousufzai, his lawyer lawyer Shoaib Shaheen and Imran spokesman, Niazullah Khan Niazi, appeared before the court.
In a separate development, the requests joined together to listen before the largest bank for tomorrow.
The Bank, led by the Justice Dogar and includes Judges Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Muhammad Azam Khan, will listen to the pleas, which include the case of A Yousufzai contempt.
The 26 requests, including the requests for contempt to the Court against Anjum, were transferred to the largest bank in the request of the Adiala prison officer, who cited logistics challenges when appearing before multiple banks.
In one of those requests presented by Yousafzai, Judge Ishaq had ordered the authorities to produce the founder of PTI before the court. However, citing security concerns, the directive was not fulfilled.
The judge later assigned to the secretary of the Sakina Bangash Court to visit the prison and verify if Imran had denied access to his legal advisor. Bangash, however, could not meet the former PM, leaving the key questions without a response. This problem should also be addressed by the largest bank.
The audience
When the hearing began in the morning, Judge Ishaq summoned Sultan Sultan Mehmood and the general lawyer of Islamabad at 11 am to find the reasons for cancellation of the list of causes.
“Are you involved in what happened?” Judge Ishaq asked the general defender. When Mehmood arrived, the judge asked him: “What directives did you cancel the list of causes?”
The deputy secretary replied: “We were instructed by the [IHC] The Office of the President of the Supreme Court, which said that a larger bank has formed so that it can cancel the list of causes of this case. “
Then, the judge asked him by virtue of what law was the “diverse request for the transfer of the case” submitted. “Does support of the State transfers a case without the [presiding] The will of the judge? “He also asked.
“Instead of doing this, you could have planted explosives in the foundations of my court and fly it,” said Judge Ishaq, expressing his disgust.
By noticing the lack of “resolving basic questions,” the judge regretted how the country would progress if the courts were deliberating about the same foundations “every 10 years.”
“There is no greater madness than the economy that progresses without the implementation of the law,” he observed.
Judge Ishaq emphasized that it was not his “personality or authority but the respect of the Superior Court.” “Will the public’s belief be maintained in the justice system in this way?” He asked rhetorically.
At this point, Yousufzai lawyer, Shaheen, said that the State and the prison superintendent were not even the affected parties in the case. “What justice would we get tomorrow?” PTI’s lawyer said.
Yousufzai herself said that if this was happening to them outside the prison, who knew for what the founder of PTI and his wife Bushra Bibi were passing in jail.
To this, Judge Ishaq replied: “Are you talking about that?
Then, the judge requested written answers from both the deputy secretary and the general lawyer of Islamabad about the transfer of the case and the subsequent cancellation of the list of causes.
“Does the president of the Supreme Court have the authority to transfer a pending case before a judge to another judge without his consent?” Judge Ishaq asked.
“Suppose there is a very corrupt president in the future. He wondered.” If a part has three cases, can the ongoing case be transferred if you ask the President of the Supreme Court?
“Are you opening the doors to corruption and nepotism?” Judge Ishaq asked, adding that it was synonymous with deceiving the Court of Justice.
“It is not in the IHC rules that [without] The judge’s will, the President of Justice transfers the case, “warned the judge. [matter] An ego issue will tear this superior court.
“If the State has decided that they have to win an ego war, then it has no point of sitting here,” said IHC judge, highlighting that the main judge of the court was also bound by law and could not act on their whims.
“Will the secretary’s office judge decide whether the judge should listen to the case or not? Judge Ishaq asked.
To this, the Deputy Secretary (Judicial) replied: “We sent the matter to the office of the president of the Supreme Court to obtain instructions and told us to transfer the case to a larger bank.”
“The procedures before the largest bank are kept in contempt for the procedures of this court,” said Judge Ishaq.
“The true responsibility of the judges is the public. [the case]. “
The judge said he was taking measures to solve all these questions.
“The public must know that the judges of the Superior Court will not tolerate this invasion of the independence of the Judiciary,” said Judge Ishaq.
“It bothered me last night that this matter has reached this point,” he said.
“You have gone so far that the commission has not gathered for a minute,” Judge Ishaq told the subdintorador. “You have decided that even the centenary traditions have to be abolished.”
Subsequently, the case was postponed until tomorrow (Thursday).
