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.
IS CJ THE ONLY CORRUPT GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY?????. CHEAP POLITICS!
@bhindigosht
The electronic media started an all over assault but soon the order came and the channels started to be silent and only GEO was there. It too had CAPITAL TALK going out of HAMID MIR’s hands so it was winded up and KAMRAN KHAN came. Its also a great test to the commitment of MEDIA.
@ TO Musharraf Spoons :
What you have to say about this charge sheet?
The Lahore high court , in 2003 was being overwhelmed by complaints of military corruption involving the highest ranking generals.
The petition includes claims that:
* Air Chief Marshal Abbas Khattak (retired) received Rs180 million as kickbacks in the purchase of 40 old Mirage fighters.
* Air Chief Marshal Farooq Feroz Khan was suspected of receiving a 5 per cent commission in the purchase of 40 F-7 planes worth $271 million.
* In 1996, the Pakistan Army bought 1,047 GS-90 Jeeps at a cost of $20,889 per unit. The market value of the vehicle then was only $13,000. According to the National Accountability Bureau, some senior army officers made Rs 510 million in the deal.
* One hundred and eleven army men got 400 plots in Bahawalpur and Rahimyar Khan districts at throwaway prices –Rs 47.50 per kanal (1/8th of an acre) as against the market rate of Rs15,000-20,000. Six respondents got 400 kanals in Punjab, while former NAB chairman Lt Gen Mohammad Amjad was allotted a two-kanal plot on Sarwar Road in Lahore for just Rs 8,00,000, payable in instalments over 20 years. The market value of this plot was Rs 2 crore.
* Gen Pervez Musharraf acquired a commercial plot worth Rs 2 crore at the Defence Housing Authority in Lahore for just Rs 1,00,000, payable in 20 years. “As mentioned in the report of defence services director-general, a loss of Rs 5 billion was incurred due to such allotments,” the petition says.
* The army awarded a contract for the purchase of 1,000 Hino trucks at $40,000 a unit when the local Gandhara Industries had offered trucks of the same specification for $25,000 a piece.
* In the purchase of 3,000 Land Rovers in 1995, army officials allegedly received around Rs20,00,000 as kickbacks.
* The army management at the Water and Power Development Authority purchased electric meters at Rs 1,050 a piece against the market price of Rs 456, causing a loss of Rs 165 crore to the national exchequer.
* A former military regime sold the Pak-Saudi Fertilizers for Rs 700 crore and earned a Rs 200 crore commission on the deal.
* In 1996, the Pakistan Navy spent Rs 1.3 crore on installing air-conditioners at the Islamabad Golf Club without any justification.
Read more at
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/sep/16pak3.htm
TODAY IS A BLACK DAY in the history of PAKISTAN.
ONE man , trying to save his Generals, the thugs, the ISI ruined the justice & judiciary under his feet.
He planned & designed & framed a drama, starting with the notorious PTV then moving onto newspapers spreading one only-accusations-filled letter.
Then all of a sudden, just like the dogs & wolves do, seeing the opportunity good & knowing that second senior Judge is out of country thrashed the pieces of judiciary left & right.
He tried to threat him by calling him to Aewan-e-saddar & kept him there till eve & offering a safe exit by resignation & failing to which he has now kept him in siege.
JUSTICE has been murdered not a CHIEF JUSTICE
By way of update and some clarity (especially on whether the CJ was ‘removed’ or has been ‘suspended’) here is the blow by blow from DAWN today:
————————–
(BTW, the headline says its all:
“CJ suspended, escorted home: • Justice Iftikhar summoned by SJC on 13th for reference hearing • Ex-judges call it a blow to judiciary’s independence; minister defends decision • Whither judicial activism?”)
ISLAMABAD, March 9: In a highly dramatic move that has the potential to change the course of judicial activism in the country, President General Pervez Musharraf on Friday virtually suspended the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, and appointed the available senior-most judge, Justice Javed Iqbal, as the acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The move to make Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry ‘non functional’ was immediately followed by yet another decision by the president to send a reference under Article 209 of the Constitution to the Supreme Judicial Council to investigate allegations of misconduct against him. Notwithstanding the intense debate that soon started within the legal fraternity on the question of the president’s authority to make the Supreme Court chief justice ‘non-functional’, it was being said that if the newly constituted judicial council found him guilty of the charges, he would be removed from office.
Although the country’s judicial history has been a chequered one all along, and judges have been removed by various methods, this is the first time that the chief justice of Pakistan has been made, in the words of the official handout, ‘non-functional’ and his case has been sent to the Supreme Judicial Council for action.
The president’s orders came in the afternoon, and within minutes took the country by storm. Many in the legal fraternity were shocked by the way the country’s top adjudicator had been treated. Among them was the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Munir A. Malik, who described it as a ‘blatant attack on the independence of the judiciary’, and former chief justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui.
Still, a few thought it was bound to happen as, according to them, the chief justice’s style of judicial activism, and his personal conduct on some issues, was a bit too unsettling for the government. The most vocal defender of the move was the minister of state for information, who said the president had no choice but to take action after serious allegations of misconduct and misuse of authority had been levelled against the chief justice.
But as the debate continued to rage, with private televisions having a field day in covering the story, most legal and constitutional experts were of the view that the move was likely to create a new crisis rather than resolving it.
As speculations started to grip bar rooms and political circles about the fate of the judiciary, and the impact of the move on other key issues, the acting chief justice was sworn in by a brother judge, Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, in an ‘uncharacteristically simple ceremony’. The traditional fanfare that has been the highlight of such ceremonies was missing and instead of the main hall of the Supreme Court, a small room on the third floor of the judges’ block was chosen for the occasion.
The media persons and the accompanying cameras clearly outnumbered the officers of the court at the ceremony as most of the brother judges (as they are mostly referred to by their colleagues) were conspicuous by their absence. So was the Attorney General Makhdoom Ali Khan, even though he was seen in precincts of the court house, and also the veteran lawyer and Prime Minister’s adviser, Sharifuddin Pirzada.
Along with a handful of lawyers, Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi witnessed the ceremony as Justice Hameed Dogar administered oath from the acting chief justice. Later on it was explained to the media that the senior-most judge after chief justice was Justice Bhagwandas, but since he was away from the country, so Justice Javed Iqbal being the second in line was made the acting head of the apex court.
Lawyers and other staff at the Supreme Court said the day started with the usual routine, with even the Chief Justice, Iftikhar Chaudhry handing cases in the courtroom. However, events started to take a dramatic turn around noon when the country’s chief adjudicator was summoned to the President’s Camp Office, located in the annexe of the army chief’s official residence in Rawalpindi. There in the presence of Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, President Musharraf informed him of the allegations that had been taking rounds in the country, particularly his alleged misconduct in handling matters within and outside the court. According to an official handout, when confronted, the chief justice had no answer.
The President also informed the chief justice that he was being made “non-functional”, an acting chief justice was being appointed, and a reference against him was being sent to the Supreme Judicial Council, comprising senior judges of the Supreme Court and the chief justices of the four provinces.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s reaction was not known as since his “suspension” or being made “non-functional” he had remained incommunicado. After his meeting with President Musharraf, he remained inside the President camp office for a few hours, and was later prevented from going to the Supreme Court by the security officials. Informed sources told Dawn that when late in the afternoon Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was returning from the President’s camp office he tried to go to the apex court, but a strong police posse chased his car which was blocked near Serena hotel. In the meantime senior superintendent of police Tariq Yasin rushed to the spot, and escorted the chief justice to his official residence. The security outside his residence had already been increased, and it was not possible to even contact him on telephone.
By this time security had also been stepped up outside the Supreme Court building where only lawyers and journalists were being allowed after proving their identity. As the oath taking ceremony ended, a beaming acting chief justice hugged his brother judge, Justice Dogar who had administered the oath, and started to walk towards his chamber. He was repeatedly asked for comments by a battery of reporters, but understandably he constantly parried the questions. “It’s premature to say anything right now,” he observed on being asked about the likely outcome of the reference sent against the chief justice.
Soon after the oath taking ceremony, the Supreme Judicial Council went into a session and decided to call Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on March 13 to answer the allegations of misconduct levelled against him. Presided over by Acting Chief Justice Javed Iqbal, the SJC also ordered the chief justice not to perform functions as judge of the Supreme Court or as the chief justice till the reference was decided by the council.
The SJC meeting was also attended by apex court judges namely Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Chief Justice of Lahore High Court Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry and Chief Justice Sindh High Court Sabihuddin Ahmad, who had flown into Islamabad earlier in the day.
Although the events during the day had moved at a fast pace, the action against the chief justice was not entirely unexpected. Stories about favours given to his son had already been taking rounds, and his desire to remain in the news through his court decision was becoming a source of annoyance for some in the government. But it was most his judicial activism, which on the one hand had made him popular in the eyes of ordinary people seeking justice but on the other had also irked a few in the establishment. Some of his decisions had started to appear like an open challenge to the government, and in recent weeks cases of missing persons had been a cause of embarrassment for a few in high places.
But members of the legal fraternity point out that the turning point came with the appearance of a so-called “open letter” by a lawyer-cum-television personality, Naeem Bokhari in which Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was accused of a series of doing favours and violating judicial norms and practices. He was accused by Mr Bokhari of running a “slaughter house” in the name of courtroom, and warned of a “rebellion” if he did not change his style and behaviour.
Since then it was widely believed in the legal and political circles that there was more to the “open letter” then a simple attempt by an officer of the court to challenge the highest adjudicator of the country. Whether the president’s action was a direct result of this letter is not clear, but the minister of state for information. Tariq Azeem, while taking part in a discussion on a local television, said after the serious allegations levelled by Mr Naeem Bokhari it was not possible for the President to sit idle and not take any action.
@bhindigosht
That I do not know. ALthough I suspect it may be so. Or at least that is what Mush would like. Lets wait and see.