IHC Judges’ Letter: SC Resumes Hearing of Suo Motu Case

Tue Apr 30 2024
icon-facebook icon-twitter icon-whatsapp

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has resumed the hearing of a suo motu case relating to Islamabad High Court judges’ letter, local media reported on Tuesday.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, the six-member bench comprises Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Musarrat Hilali.

Today’s Hearing

At the start of the hearing, the Chief Justice of Pakistan said that the Supreme Court’s bench formation committee has “decided that all judges available in Islamabad should convene immediately.”

He said, “If someone can impose a will upon this court, that is also interference; interference can be from within, from without, from your family, from social media, from your colleagues, from everybody else.” CJP Isa then asked AGP Awan if he had gone through the suggestions made by the Islamabad High Court judges. Upon AGP’s response in “no” the CJP asked on how to proceed with the matter then.

On the occasion, Justice Minallah said, “I worked as Chief Justice for around four years in 2018, no one interfered. It seems that people attempt to intervene, sometimes they benefit and sometimes not”.

The CJP said, “If my work is hindered with and I cannot prevent it, I will go home”.  The CJP said “I have fought for the independence of country’s judiciary. The biggest threat to the judiciary was not from the outside, but from the inside.”

Background

In March, Islamabad High Court judges including Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir, Justice Babar Sattar,  and Justice Saman Raffat Imtiaz Tuesday wrote letter to Supreme Judicial Council seeking guidance on the interference of executive in judicial affairs.

Later, the Supreme Court of Pakistan took suo motu on a letter of the Islamabad High Court judges of interference and intimidation by the executive in judicial function.

icon-facebook icon-twitter icon-whatsapp