Adil Najam
In a rather shocking move, the President, Gen. Perzez Musharraf just dismissed the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry for alleged “misuse of authority.”
According to a breaking news segment at The News:
The president has submitted a case against Chaudhry to the Supreme Judicial Council. Musharraf had received “numerous complaints and serious allegations for misconduct, misuse of authority and actions prejudicial to the dignity of office of the chief justice of Pakistan,” and Chaudhry had been unable to give a satisfactory explanation, sources said. The report did not specify what he was accused of. The council is a panel of top Pakistani judges that adjudicates cases brought against serving judges and will decide whether the charges against Chaudhry merit his formal dismissal and whether he should be prosecuted.
Basing their story on the Associated Press of Pakistan, the BBC reports further:
Mr Chaudhry was summoned to explain himself to Gen Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz. His case was then referred to the Supreme Judicial Council which will decide if Mr Chaudhry should be prosecuted.
The move has shocked many, but signs of its coming can now be identified in hindsight. Mr. Chaudhry had served as the Chief Justice since 2005 and, on occasion, had taken steps that had irked the power structure in Pakistan.
According to a Khaleej Times report, for example:
Last June, the Supreme Court rejected a government move to sell 75 percent of state-owned Pakistan Steel Mills to a Saudi-Russian-Pakistani consortium for 21.7 billion rupees ($362 million). Mill workers claimed it was greatly undervalued. Also, Chaudhry has heard a landmark case brought by relatives of dozens of people believed taken into secret custody by Pakistani intelligence agencies. The chief justice has pressed the government to provide information on the detainees whereabouts. Talat Masood, a political analyst, said the removal of Chaudhry demonstrated the power of the military and suggested that Musharraf’s government wanted to have a “pliable judiciary” ahead of parliamentary elections expected later this year. Musharraf, who took power in a bloodless coup in 1999, is widely expected to seek another five-year term as president from parliament this fall.
Recently, an open letter from Advocate Naeem Bokhari addressed to the Chief Justice and making a number of allegations against him – some personal – has been circulating on the internet extensively. Over the last week, I received probably two dozen emails with that letter in it (many from our readers, and one from my mother!). It seems to have created a stir. Many readers have been writing that we do a post on that letter. I had not done so, just because the letter was a little puzzling to me and its motivations were not clear. I wondered also if there were hints of personal rivalries or issues. On the other hand it was a well-written and seemingly sincere letter from a person of known integrity. In retrospect, the way the letter ended was prophetic:
My Lord, this communication may anger you and you are in any case prone to get angry in a flash, but do reflect upon it. Perhaps you are not cognizant of what your brother judges feel and say about you. My Lord, before a rebellion arises among your brother judges (as in the case of Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah), before the Bar stands up collectively and before the entire matter is placed before the Supreme Judicial Council, there may be time to change and make amends. I hope you have the wisdom and courage to make these amends and restore serenity, calm, compassion, patience and justice tempered with mercy to my Supreme Court. My Lord, we all live in the womb of time and are judged, both by the present and by history. The judgement about you, being rendered in the present, is adverse in the extreme.
In all honesty, one has to wonder, however, whether it was that letter and other recent media focus on the Chief Justice that led to the removal of the Chief Justice, or whether these were merely instruments designed to prepare the way for this removal?
In either case, a removal of the Chief Justice in this way and for such reasons and at this time is a sad, sad development that will be one more blow to the hopes of the development of an independent judiciary in Pakistan.
Note: At various points we have reproduced, in our right-most column, cartoons from Daily Times (and here) and The News.
@king_faisal
OK. Yes, there is precedent.
So does that mean that therefore it is OK for Musharraf to do what he did.
If so, then why did he kick out earlier people, if he and his folowers are going to justify their actions by saying that “BB and Nawaz Sharif did the same,” then – since there is no difference now between them and Mush – why not just get them back?
apologies for hogging this board. however this is important since people are not getting information from the electronic media. people are free to make up their mind but they should try to get a bit more colour to form a reasonable opinion. and no i am not an isi jasoos being paid to flood cyberspace:
below is column by cowasjee on this very issue:
http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia /SAserials/Dawn/2001/apr2101.html
…In 1996, whilst waiting for the verdict in the Judges Case, Benazir was sitting with me anticipating the Supreme Court order. When it came she called her legal advisers, Yahya Bakhtiar being one, and asked for advice. She then told me that I must denotify the Chief Justice [Sajjad Ali Shah]. When I said ‘no’, she then said I must send his case to the Supreme Judicial Council. I said
‘no’ again…
“She came to the presidency and was very distraught and on the verge of weeping. ‘Farooq Bhai, you are throwing me to the wolves.
…”Exactly one year and three months later [October 16, 1997] there was almost a repeat performance on the same issue. The demand was identical. Denotify the Chief Justice of Pakistan [Sajjad Ali Shah]. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif came to see me …
people can pretend that pakistan is sweden and that musharraf’s actions have no precedent. reality though is slightly different. here is little summary of the interaction of democratically elected leaders with higher judiciary:
bhutto
i. passed the fifth amendment which reduced the time judges could serve on the superior courts. aim was to get rid of serving judges who were non-compliant
ii. passed the sixth amendment which again changed the serving period – this time increasing the term of chief justice. aim was to reward the stooge chief justice
benazir
defied specific supreme orders in the “judges case”. against precedence and against supreme court recommendation appointed sajjad ali shah as chief justice over two senior judges. sajjad ali shah was to later uphold benazir’s dismissal by leghari
nawaz sharif
got in dispute with sajjad ali shah who requested president and coas to provide protection to the supreme court against supporters of nawaz. both the president and coas refused after which supreme court was stormed. supreme court of quetta removed sajjad ali shah much in the same manner that current chief justice has been removed. farooq leghari resigned to protest the dismissal of sajjad ali shah.
all the information presented above can be verified from the web. people who are claiming that musharraf’s action is without precedent are simply lying. and if you think things are bad now, multiply whats happening today by 100 and you will get an indication of what things were like during the whole of the 90’s. cowasjee in the following article has good summary. enjoy:
http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/991017.htm
I don’t think the Pakistani nation should settle for anything less than the reinstatement of the CJP.
Also, it is interesting the major Pakistani news and media sites haven’t given any significant updates in last 12-16 hours.
Agencies normally install equipments for monitoring. I am sure everything is monitored and reported to Mushy.
As somebody wrote in article, lets see if judiciary has courage to save its head like the Army did when Nawaz fired its head. Also this time, action by Mushy is unanimously criticized by advocates in particular and people of pakistan in general. Lets see if five members of judiciary reject the case otherwise history will add few more names to category of Justice Munir.