“Had our superior judiciary followed the path of non-PCO judges, the course of Pakistan’s political and judicial history would have been different,” the verdict authored by Justice Javed Iqbal observed.
“In fact the (July 31, 2009) judgment has been considered in the country as well as on global level as a triumph of democratic principles and a stinging negation of the dictatorship,” it said......
Denouncing military takeovers of the last four decades and their endorsement by the superior judiciary, a 14-judge bench of Supreme Court had issued a short order on July 31, declaring Gen Pervez Musharraf’s second coup through Emergency Order of Nov 3, 2007, as unconstitutional and announced most of the actions taken under it, including the appointment of Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar as chief justice of the Supreme Court and several other judges and establishment of the Islamabad High Court, as illegal.
Contempt notices were issued to a number of superior court judges for defying the Nov 3, 2007, restraining order issued by a seven-judge bench.
The judges had filed review petitions seeking modifications on certain paragraphs in the July 31 judgment. They included Justices Khurshid Anwar Bhinder, Hasnat Ahmed Khan, Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry, Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, Mrs Yasmin Abbasi, Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon, Anwar-ul-Haq Pannu, Syed Hamid Ali Shah and Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari.
Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza Khan dissented with the verdict on the review petitions. Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed and Justice Rehman Hussain Jafferi added separate notes to the verdict.
Justice Javed Iqbal observed that the July 31 verdict was a first instance by the Supreme Court which stated in a categorical, loud and abundantly clear manner that military interventions were illegal and would hardly find any colluder in future within the judiciary.
The detailed judgment said: “The July 31 verdict provides much-needed redress as it will render considerable help in blocking the way of adventurers and dictators to creep in easily by taking supra-constitutiona l steps endorsed, supported and upheld under the garb of the principle of necessity in the past which will never happen again.
“The verdict has been appreciated by all segments of society for being issue-oriented rather than individual-specific and, therefore, no individual including the petitioners should be aggrieved. The judgment will encourage future justices to take the firm stand against usurpers.
“Being in the supreme national interest, the verdict hardly needs any justification for review.”
In his dissenting note, Justice Sardar Raza said that no doubt the July 31 verdict was an important judgment in the country’s judicial history, but another equally important aspect, thereof, was that it practically damaged none except the weakest of the strata.
The note said: “On the one hand the judges are considered so honourable and so exalted that even the issuance of notices to them in a very crucial matter is considered below their dignity and, on the other hand, they are issued contempt notices in utter disregard of their status as well as the principle of comity among judges.
“For a long time, they (judges) have been hearing the cases of millions of litigant public; they have been awarding decrees, recording convictions, imposing sentences and redressing the grievances of the people (which actions we have safeguarded in our judgment of July 31) and for a long time they have been addressed by the counsel and the litigant public as ‘my lord’.
“But they (judges) are issued contempt notices, insulted and humiliated in court to such an extent that one of the advocates among the audience, uninvitedly and uninterruptedly stands up, pointing out his finger at Justice Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bukhari and proclaiming in the open court, “isko saza do, isko zaroor saza do, isko exemplary punishment do.
“This act has shocked me so much as if that the counsel was pointing his finger at us. In view of the dignity attached to their high offices and the exalted image that the public have about the judges of superior judiciary, I am of the firm opinion and hold that the contempt proceedings against the judges be not initiated and if so, the notices be withdrawn.”
http://www.dawn. com/wps/wcm/ connect/dawn- content-library/ dawn/the- newspaper/ front-page/ detailed- judgment- on-contempt- notices-released -610
0 comments:
Post a Comment