ISLAMABAD (Web Desk) – The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved decision on the appeal of former Islamabad High Court judge Shahid Aziz Siddiqui against his removal from office.
“We are reserving the decision. If deemed necessary, the case can be re-heard,” Chief Justice (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa announced after the hearing on appeal.
When Advocate Hamid Khan said that the apex court had laid down the principle that a judge should be given the opportunity of an inquiry, the CJP observed that no one can be punished without [holding] inquiry. “We cannot ignore basic human rights.”
In his written order, the chief justice raised some questions and sought their replies from lawyers.
Can a judge be removed without inquiry? Can the matter referred to the Supreme Judicial Council? Was there any need for an inquiry after admitting the speech a misconduct?
Chief Justice Isa said in his written order that former registrar of Supreme Court Arbab Arif also submitted a reply. “We also heard Advocate Hamid and attorney general. The parties submitted written responses to the questions raised during the court proceedings.
“Did the Judicial Council conduct an inquiry? If the inquiry was not conducted according to the constitution and law, what will be the result?" the CJP asked in his order.
“Shaukat Aziz turned 62 on 30th June 2021, now if the appeal is accepted, can relief be given to him?
“Can the Supreme Court remit the matter to the Supreme Judicial Council?
"If there is no need for the action of the council, is Shaukat Siddiqui's speech not itself against the code of conduct?”
The parties should answer these questions within three weeks, and if deemed necessary, further judicial proceedings may also be taken, the CJP dictated.
Earlier the chief justice remarked that the question is; "what the judge said is true or not. Meetings have been denied [by Gen Faiz and others]. We cannot decide on mere assumptions," he added.
“If removing a judge is made so easy, it will be a threat to the independence of the judiciary. The people have right to know the truth. It is a matter of public interest.”
The CJP observed that the question whether we can send the matter to the [Supreme Judicial] Council or not is also important.
EARLIER PROCEEDINGS
The CJP observed that the nation should also know whether the allegations [of former justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui] are true or not.
He gave these remarks while hearing appeal against the dismissal of former Islamabad High Court judge.
The CJP remarked that if it was not determined whether the allegations were true or false, how the case would proceed to its logical end.
“We want to set precedence through these cases,” he continued.
The chief justice said allegations were made publicly. If the allegations were found to be false after an inquiry, would the decision to remove the judge stand?
Headed by CJP Isa, the bench comprising Justice Aminuddin, Justice Jamal Mandokhel, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Irfan Saadat heard the appeal. The counsel for Shaukat Siddiqui, Advocate Hamid Khan said that Lt-Gen (retd) Faiz Hameed denied the allegations. This is our case. The Supreme Judicial Council should have conducted an inquiry first where we had an opportunity for cross-examination.
Chief Justice Isa said that the facts stated by the attorney general were not investigated. Now tell me what do you recommend, how to proceed?
Advocate Khan replied the action of the Supreme Judicial Council should be declared illegal.
He said that the action against Shaukat Siddiqui should be annulled. After that a commission should be formed and an inquiry should be conducted on the matter.
KHAWAJA HARIS PLEA
Earlier, counsel for Lt-Gen (retd) Faiz, Advocate Khawaja Haris said that the judge did not accuse his client in his speech nor before the Supreme Judicial Council.
His speech was a proof of misconduct, he added.
CJP Isa inquired how he [judge Siddiqui] violated the code of conduct by delivering a speech. Show the relevant clause, read the Judges' Code of Conduct.
He remarked that the speech can be seen not as a publicity stunt but also as a revelation. If there is corruption in an institution, what should a judge do?
Advocate Haris obstinately said that he should tell his chief justice.