At first the non-functional Chief Justice reposed full confidence in the Acting CJ Rana’s ability to deliver a fair verdict, but now he is questioning a majority of the justices on the SJC. While I am sure Chaudhury sahib has some valid points, it shows what a sorry state relations between him and his fellow superior judges were, even before his suspension.
Defence to raise objection to three SJC judges
Non-functional Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry’s team of lawyers will focus on the “bias” of three of the members of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) during Friday’s proceedings of the presidential reference, leading defence advocate Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan said on Thursday.** “The three judges in question are going to directly benefit if Justice Chaudhry is removed,”** he told The News. Justice Javed Iqbal, a member of the SJC, will have “four years as chief justice if Justice Chaudhry loses his office”. Aitzaz Ahsan said. “Another SJC member, Lahore High Court (LHC) Chief Justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry, can’t be elevated to the Supreme Court if Justice Chaudhry continues to hold his judicial position. His career advancement is tied to the chief judge’s removal,” he added.
He said that references are also pending against Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and the LHC chief justice. “If the chief justice is suspended, why the same treatment should not be meted out to these judges as well?” Aitzaz said there were other issues also. “The LHC chief justice has personal hostility against Justice Chaudhry… even he doesn’t shake hands with the chief justice,” he claimed. “Also, an acting chief justice can’t preside over the SJC under the Supreme Court ruling in the famous 1996 Judges’ case and only the incumbent chief justice can do so,” he added. On the other hand, the panel of lawyers, representing the referring authority (President Gen Pervez Musharraf) met on Thursday to give final touches to its arguments in the SJC session. They also held a meeting with Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz in this regard. The government would produce half a dozen witnesses before the SJC to support the documentary evidence filed with the reference, said one of the lawyers of the referring authority. “The government side would not file any application with the SJC and was preparing to oppose the defence panel’s arguments on different subjects,” he told this correspondent. In its last session, the SJC had reserved its ruling after on the question whether or not its proceedings should be held in-camera. The defence team has been demanding open session. In the meantime, the opposition parties have given separate and collective calls to protest in front of the Supreme Court building during the SJC proceedings. The lawyers community has also announced that its members would gather in a big number at this point to protest the reference against Justice Chaudhry. As usual, the government has put in place tight security measures and deployed paramilitary forces and police. However, it would continue with its policy of not to use force to obstruct protesters from going to the venue.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
I found this part particularly amusing, especially as there is no allegation of improper conduct against the ex Acting SC Javed Iqbal , just the fact that he will become the CJ sometime in the future. What sort of flimsy charge is that by Ch. Iftikhar’s side?
Chaudhry has reportedly expressed ‘complete faith’ in Justice Rana Bhagwandas who was sworn in as acting chief justice Saturday.
Justice Chaudhry, currently facing a presidential reference, believes he will receive a fair hearing before the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) headed by Justice Bhagwandas.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
I think the political counsel of Ch. Iftikhar (Aitzaz Ahsan is a senior PPP MNA) are themselves angry that so few superior justices have resigned in support of the CJ.
There are a total of 19 Justices in the Supreme Court of Pakistan](http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk//intro-judges.htm) - not one has resigned to date. In fact two have come forward and been sworn in as Chief Justices in Chaudhury’s place.
In addition there are over80 justices who sit in the four provincial High Courts (Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta), and to date ONLY one has resigned.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
Aalsi, I still see Ch. Iftikhar as quite a good person whose ommissions or sins are forgiveable, and I do not hold him responsible for the recent statements coming from his PPP MNA counsel Aitzaz Ahsan. Ch. Iftikhar damaged his own credibility in the early days when he was seen in practical bear hugs with Maulana Fazlur Rahman, Aitzaz Ahsan and other politcal opportnists. But to his credit he has told them to stay clearly away from him after that, and has kept his statements above board and neutral. Eventually I think this will only be resolved between the top man himself (Musharraf) and Ch.Iftikhar once both have got their political cheerleaders under control.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
wait .. hold on there a sec slly billy...is that so?
I thought judges were retiring ba-jamaat in support of Ifti, is that not true?
maybe people meant Judge Dredd?
Yes, that is true. There were a few lower level court judges who did resign, but there are many thousands of them in Pakistan, so that was a very minimal protest overall.
So the fact remains that of over 100 Superior Courts Justices - only 1 has resigned to date.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
wait .. hold on there a sec slly billy...is that so?
I thought judges were retiring ba-jamaat in support of Ifti, is that not true?
maybe people meant Judge Dredd?
Fraudia Bhai, there is no tax on dreaming and having illusions :D.
But then, the crooks that tried to give such impression that judges are resigning in droves (making hill out of molehill), they are such immoral crooks that even if there was tax on dreaming and having illusions, they would have evaded taxes and still would have dreamt same, giving the impression to people that judges are resigning in droves.
Actually, for them crooks, their reality is not what is happening in real but it is their imaginative desires. These crooks also expect that all Pakistan should accept their dreams and illusions, and if anyone does not accept what they say, these are not loyal Pakistanis. Unfortunately, most Pakistanis do not let them crooks down, as they accept what these crooks say and close their eyes from any reality.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
Kharboozaey ko dekh kar kharbooza rung pakrta hai. If the president can go around being a gundaa why can't the others. That doesn't mean that they should but they are following the example of the great leader in Islamabad.
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
so the judges who did resign were summoned to the president house and degraded for 5 hours?
somehow I missed that.
Maybe it did not happen because so many judges resigned that there were not enough hours available to degrade them in president house
anyways returning to the topic, ifti seems to have a lot of nakhray. first it was oh bhagwandas will do what is right to now, oh i only want my best friends to be on the review council, and my brother and my bacchpan ka dost and errr my son yeah…
Re: Non-functional Chief Justice v Supreme Judicial Council
People forget that most judges who had courage to stand up had resigned when Musharraf wanted them to take oath under PCO. 6 out of 13 judges of apex court resigned.
