Islamabad:
The legal minds are in shock for an unprecedented development in the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC), where Judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri has been excluded from the list of the next three days.
Although a division bank led by the president of the Supreme Court Sarfraz Dogar has not yet issued a written order in the case of Judge Jahangiri, there are reports that the judge has been restricted from judicial work.
The situation will be clear after passing through the written order. However, of the new list it is clear that Judge Jahangiri is not part of any bank or division bank for the next three days. It will be interesting if the written order will be issued after the immense criticism by lawyers.
Legal minds are unanimous that the judge of the Superior Court cannot be restricted from judicial work through a court order, since it will invite anarchy in the Judiciary. The former president of the Law Association of the Superior Court of Sindh (SHCBA), Salahuddin Ahmed, says it is difficult to imagine a “more flagrant, illegal order or a more obviously dripping order” partially.
“Judge Jahangiri was a petitioner in the Supreme Court against the transfer of the President of the Supreme Court to give the IHC. Both the code of conduct of the judges and the basic judicial ethics issued that the president of the Supreme Court Dugar could not sit on a bank listening to the request against Judge Jhangiri. But he did,” he said.
Salahuddin also declared that the Supreme Court in Gul Taiz Marwat has declared that a bank/judge in the Superior Court cannot entertain a petition against another bank/judge. It is prohibited by article 199 (5) of the Constitution and the rules of the judicial community. But the Bank of the President of the Supreme Court Dogar and Judge Azam had obviously read neither the trial nor article 199 “.
He also said that the Supreme Court in the case of Iftikhar Chaudhry has declared that a judge cannot be restricted from the judicial work, since that is equivalent to an elimination of a judge, which only the Supreme Judicial Council can do under article 209 of the Constitution. But this bank has probably not read that judgment either.
Faisal Siddiqi’s defender said that Judge Judge Judge’s virtual suspension is so unconstitutional and reckless an act as the suspension of former justice president Iphtikhar Chaudhry by the military ruler Pervez Musharrafff. The president of the Supreme Court Dogar is walking through the steps of the dictator. But all responsibility and responsibility meet the president of the Supreme Court Yahya Afridi, who can stop the full anarchy in the IHC, he added.
The former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar said that this is a flagrant violation of the Supreme Court Judgment in CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry Case, which unequivocally ruled “even a temporary interference with the office of a judge …” by any authority, against which a reference is hitting “before the SJC.
Waqar Rana’s lawyer said that Iphikhar Chaudhry has already been held in the case that a judge cannot be suspended during procedures for charges of bad behavior against him. Even the ordinance by which the SJC is empowered to suspend a judge was declared unconstitutional.
“In a writing of Quo Guarano, provisional relief is not granted in the form of suspension because that would be equivalent to a final relief. The suspension order is obviously illegal, without jurisdiction and bad faith. The judge must present request against the order,” adds frog.
The lawyer Asad Rahim Khan said that it has been established as clear as the day at Iftikhar Chaudhry versus Pakistan president that not even the SJC has the authority to prevent a judge from carrying out its functions. And that is in relation to the constitutional body responsible for holding the judges, what to say about their colleagues in the same bank.
Khan declared that given this declaration of the law, under what authority a judge can be restricted to the blankets of maintaining his oath? The decisions of Judge Jahangiri are free to be appealed, confirmed or reserved, as with any other judge of the superior courts. But to stop him of his duty, in himself, it is that a judge acts as if he were within a state of exception. Judicial independence has suffered enough, “he said.
Abdul Moiz Jaferi’s lawyer said: “We have been in the Super Court of Sindh to undo the decision of the unjust committee of media as the union of the University of Karachi is supported for a year. We have been pressured to explain our place to our place, our position to the demand in Tariq Jahangiri.
Hafiz Ehsaan Khokhar declared that the recent suspension order on an IHC judge sitting and the internal differences reported between the judges raise serious concerns about the credibility of the Judiciary. These orders on the unprecedented judicial side, approved without the required judicial restriction, are not justice or the confidence of citizens.
He stressed that according to article 209 of the Constitution, the appropriate forum to address the accusations against the judges is the SJC. Any action outside this constitutional path undermines judicial independence and due process. The judicial restriction should have been exercised before approved this order, since institutional credibility depends on following the correct constitutional forum.
