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.
News: Justice Jawed Iqbal has been appointed as acting chief justice of Pakistan
[quote comment=”37178″]Question: what is the procedure to remove the Chief Justice of the Pakistan Supreme Court. I looked in the section on the judiciary in the Constitution, but could not find any procedure for removal. Typically, most countries have a procedure like impeachment to remove a high judicial functionary like the Chief Justice – this is a way to separate the judiciary from the legislature and executive, while still retaining some checks and balances.
I also find it somewhat irregular that a Chief Justice can be summoned by the Prime Minister to explain himself.
Does the Constitution allow that? Even a Presidential summons would be highly unusual in most countries, though not necessarily irregular.
Here’s a link to the Pakistan Constitution
[url]http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitutio n/[/url][/quote]
There is no procedure for these kind of actions. The rule of jungle unfortunately applies in Pakistan. The person who has the power enjoys all rights.
@Adil :
Please change the link to KMB it is this one now.
http://karachi.metblogs.com/archives/2007/03/karac hiites_the_1.phtml
Also, congrats on the ARY ONE WORLD program. I am impressed by your views & I have asked our Doctor (Teeth Maestro) to contact you and get its video. If you read this please respond.
@Others
Well I shall repeat what Soban said: “has any President of Pakistan ever taken so abrupt
action against any corrupt politician. “.
I ask the same question from all pro-Mush : The allegations that have been made if you consider them technically then this gov. all its ministers except few along with the man at the top Musharraf himself have no right to sit and must leave. What about that?
@The Pakistanian
The one you read is just an accusation & as per previous CJ on TV. The CJ can do it with consultations. Please keep your info proper. As for Bhagwandas, well can anyone tell me how many years would it take to bring him back in emergency from INDIA?. The way this is all done within hours its like thieves plundering a house in a hurry
@Roshan
“the story of his doctor son who failed in CSS exams. He joined federal government on deputation got police training and later on got appointment in FIA “
I am glad you pointed this out. Thanks to the journalist who appeared on GEO today he has got all the documents which show that not only the gov. itself was involved in his son’s transfer (who interested came on TV himself last month & had confidently defended it )but the IG Punjab had signed it leads to Shaukat Aziz. How come the CJ become so powerful that he started forcing the PM to do his work. And for arguments sake suppose he did then all those police officials + IG Punjab + Shaukat Aziz are equally responsible so what about that?
The honest truth is this: The Army & ISI consider themselves as GOD on earth & don’t want anyone to raise voice against them. They along with the wadera’s of Punjab & Sindh + corrupt 21 grade officials and all those were unhappy that there is one man in this country at the top who is not letting them sleep properly.
A follow up comment to my earlier comment on the Constitutional procedures…
Article 209 of the Constitution lays down the procedure for the removal of a judge, including the Chief Justice. Here is a quote from the article
[quote](5) If, on information [231A] [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court,
(a) may be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or
(b) may have been guilty of misconduct,
the President shall direct the Council to [231B] [, or the Council may, on its own motion,] inquire into the matter.
(6) If, after inquiring into the matter, the Council reports to the President that it is of the opinion,
(a) that the Judge is incapable of performing the duties of his office or has been guilty of misconduct, and
(b) that he should be removed from office,
the President may remove the Judge from office.[/quote]
[url]http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitutio n/part7.ch4.html[/url]
It seems to be an unusual procedure to remove a judge. An impeachment is not fool proof, but at least the proceedings are held in full public view, instead of behind closed doors. And at least indirectly, the people are deciding on this, through their representatives. A procedure like the above seems to be designed to give the ability to misuse it. Was it in the original 1973 constitution, or was it the result of a subsequent amendment during the Zia years or afterwards?
Question: what is the procedure to remove the Chief Justice of the Pakistan Supreme Court. I looked in the section on the judiciary in the Constitution, but could not find any procedure for removal. Typically, most countries have a procedure like impeachment to remove a high judicial functionary like the Chief Justice – this is a way to separate the judiciary from the legislature and executive, while still retaining some checks and balances.
I also find it somewhat irregular that a Chief Justice can be summoned by the Prime Minister to explain himself. Does the Constitution allow that? Even a Presidential summons would be highly unusual in most countries, though not necessarily irregular.
Here’s a link to the Pakistan Constitution
[url]http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitutio n/[/url]