Justice Mazahar Naqvi questions ‘cloud of uncertainty that hangs over CJP’s repute’

ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court Judge Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi has written an open letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and other judges raising questions on the proceedings of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against him in an alleged corruption reference.

While addressing the chief justice, Justice Naqvi has questioned whether he has been able to exonerate his honour and do away with the cloud of uncertainty that hangs over his and the judiciary’s repute?

In the letter, Justice Mazahar Naqvi said: “I would not have written this letter in the interest of the preservation of the integrity – that which is left – of the institution where you and I hold public office had these been normal circumstances. The volume of the misinformation surrounding the matter of my case before the Supreme Judicial Council (“SJC”) is astounding. I write to you today to dispel with that misinformation, to bring to your attention the unfortunate details, to bring on record the evidence of the obstruction of justice within the Supreme Court – no one shall have the privilege to plead ignorance in this matter should the opportunity come tomorrow. “

He said that “ the honourable Justices Qazi Faez Isa and Sardar Tariq Masood wrote a letter [dated 03.04.2023] to the former Chief Justice Omar Ata Bandial encouraging an immediate initiation of proceedings against me, post the sham audio-leaks controversy, for the following purpose:

“…we must exonerate the respondent Judge and fully restore his honour or else submit our report in terms of the Constitution. To leave the respondent Judge under a cloud of uncertainty undermines his and the Judiciary’s repute. Confidence of the people in the integrity and independence of the Judiciary requires us to proceed without any further delay.”

The Supreme Court judge said:  “I ask, that which I have not before: Has the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan, up until this very moment, been able to exonerate his honour and do away with the cloud of uncertainty that hangs over his and the judiciary’s repute? Why is it that a judge with assets legally acquired and declared in his tax returns is being called to question before the SJC, when the honourable Chief Justice remains immune to any 2 such proceedings against his undeclared properties? Is there a legal or moral justification for this unreasonable disparity?”

Justice Mazahar Naqvi challenges SJC’s proceedings in SC

He further said: “Allow me to reinforce on record that the Show Cause Notice (“SCN”) [dated 28.10.2023] issued by the SJC is afflicted with grievous legal, constitutional and jurisdictional defects, all of which I communicated in a Preliminary Response [dated 10.11.2023] to the SJC. The Council, instead of meeting the demands of honour and propriety, decided to convene a series of meetings [November 20th, 21st, 22nd] with an unmistakable objective of removing the defects specified in my Preliminary Response and issued a “Revised” SCN.  As a consequence, the SJC inadvertently admitted that the initial SCN was defective, that the proceedings were initiated without any investigation or probe into the veracity of the complaints against me, that the members of the SJC are unfit to oversee the relevant proceedings on account of their decided bias and partiality.

An inconvenient truth is still the truth and so I will state it just the same: the treatment offered to me by the Chairman and the members of the SJC is nothing short of disgraceful. I have written to the SJC via their Secretary on a total of eleven instances requesting for the provision of documents necessary to the development and formation of my appropriate Defence: November 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 16th, 20th, 22nd , 30th and December 6th and 8th.”

Justice Naqvi further said: “My requests still have not been complied with. I have written in detail demanding the recusal of the Chairman and the two Honourable members of the SJC on at least 4 different occasions. My requests have not been considered, not been responded to. Did not the Chairman of the SJC in his reference before the Supreme Court of Pakistan demand the recusal of Honourable Justices Ijaz ul Ahsan and Sardar Tariq Masood? I ask again: Is there a legal or moral justification for this unreasonable disparity, this blatant violation of my fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of Pakistan, this clear obstruction of justice that I seek from the most prestigious legal forum in the country?”

He said that the two petitions under Article 184(3) of the Constitution that I had filed were finally fixed for hearing before a 3-member bench to convene on Friday, December 15th 2023. Without raising any objections on the constitution of the Bench myself, allow me to draw your attention to the recent Note [dated 11.12.2023] written by three honourable Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and addressed to the Registrar of the Supreme Court. The note exposes the manner in which the violations of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 have taken place at the hands of those in authority. It was agreed between the 3-member committee on Thursday, December 7th that the bench would comprise judges in the order of seniority unless an Honourable Judge in question does not consent to be part of that bench:

“The three-member bench constituted to hear the petitions under Art 184(3) of the Constitution does not comprise honourable judges in the order of seniority…the rule of seniority was agreed to be followed to hear these matters.” I leave you to draw your own conclusions as to why the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan has decided to constitute such a bench, and in a manner such as this. What I will, however, take the liberty to comment on is how on December 11th, 30 minutes from midnight, a letter was delivered to my residence which stated that a meeting of the SJC is scheduled for Thursday, December 14th at 2:30 PM. This has to be the first time in our unfortunate history that despite having a petition, filed and fixed before a bench, challenging the legality of the course of the SJC proceedings, the SJC has refused to stay said proceedings and convened a further meeting. Is the Supreme Court of Pakistan not a higher, more authoritative forum than a biased, questionable SJC? Is this acceptable conduct, acceptable management of the matter? It is not.”

He said that “The Chairman of the SJC is in blatant, apparent, untethered and repeated violation of the law, of my fundamental rights under the Constitution of Pakistan. This act alone is enough to prove a case of rigorous bias against the Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan. I categorically state that I have no faith in the proceedings which he is operating. His objective is clear and premeditated. Finally: I am in service of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, and hence, the people of Pakistan. I serve no one else. I refuse to become a plaything in the hands of the political elite, and I am suffering the consequences of it. I reserve my rights to challenge these bogus SJC proceedings, and I will see it to the very end. My reputation is significant, the reputation of my seat is more significant. This is, therefore, a letter to make it known that it is not a matter of my person now, it is a 4 matter of principle – my issue is now an issue of the institution. Will the Supreme Court of Pakistan not stand for anything?”