Adil Najam
Amongst the many things on my (very) long ‘to do list’ in Islamabad was a visit to the Supreme Court. I managed to cross that off the list.
I not only visited the outside of the Supreme Court but was able to negotiate my way into the (very) small Court Room Number 6 where the 5-judge bench was engrossed in the arguments about whether the current case (by the Chief Justice’s team against the President) should be heard by a full court or not.
It was a great day to be there. The issue was of substance and the big gun lawyers on both sides were there in full force, crammed into one of the smalled rooms in the court with nearly as many people standing as sitting. Miracle of miracles, I even got a set to sit on. And all this on a day when some very important issues were discussed and decided in our continuing constitutional crisis.
I spent all day there and was able to listen to the entire – I thought engrossing – proceedings. I really think that every citizen should go and see the courts in action. I have seen many, but this was really something. Frankly, I came out impressed by the court and the judges and more hopeful about our judiciary than I have been in a long time. The proceedings were lively, heated, engrossing, and intellectually stimulating.
Of course, future events could make me change my mind. But at least today, I was very impressed by the judges. More so than any of the lawyers there. Justice Javed Buttar, who was the senior most presiding judge was – I thought – extremely good in his cross examination, was fair to both sides (and hard on both too), and was able to take and give strong push on legal as well as procedural points. Personally, I found Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk to be very incisive on legal issues and quick in catching and questioning the possible chinks in the arguments of lawyers from both sides. He was also most effective in not allowing lawyers to go off on tangents – which they seemed to do very frequently. The other three judges – Chaudhry Ijaz, Raja Fayaz and Hamid Ali Mirza – spoke less, but overall I, as a citizen looking at the judiciary in action, came out feeling good about the bench as a whole.
The lawyers, I thought, were less impressive and more varied in quality of their ‘lawyering’ (again, my perspective here is of a concerned citizen, not a legal expert). Some big guns were there, including Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada and Ahmad Raza Kasuri for the government and Aitizaz Ahsan for the Chief Justice. Having heard them in non-court room environments but never in a court, I was eager to hear them argue. Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada and Ahmad Raza Kasuri were both somewhat disappointing and Aitizaz Ahsan was quite brilliant in argument. From the government side, I thought, Malik Quyyum argued most effectively. From the Chief Justice’s side, Mujeeb Pirzada was not too impressive (though his resemblance to Hafeez Pirzada was very strong).
The biggest disappointment was a certain Maulvi Iqbal. He seemed to be on the government’s side (but not on the official team) and there to essentially disrupt the proceedings. He caused a ruccus early in the day which, irrespective of its legal content (which, supposedly was also not strong) was just in bad taste. His inappropriate words, inappropriate shouting and tone and overall billigerance and confrontation with the judges reminded me of the worst threads right here on ATP.
Frankly, Justice Javed Buttar was much more patient with him than we usually are with our moderation policy here at ATP. At many times, I thought I should go to the judges and suggest to them that they should also have some ‘maaqool intezam‘ for ‘shararti‘ people. Of course I did not. But he did make me wonder if an inability to argue intellectually without resorting to inappropriate behavior has now become a national trait. On the other hand, the zarf of the judges in dealing with him was rather impressive.
Of course, the substance of the day was very eventful and may, eventually, turn the direction of the entire ‘constitutional crisis’ at hand. But let me not comment on that since that is all over the media. I thought these personal reflections on ‘my day at the Supreme Court of Pakistan’ may be more interesting to readers. Let me say that these are exactly that – personal reflections; please take them as no more than just that.
(P.S. I am writing from a rather slow phone connection, so apologies for any mistakes here. I will try to correct them, add links, and possibly even add more material, later tonight).
Wonderful report, Adil! Thank you for posting this. And no, this was not TOO impressionistic. This is the kind of thing we don’t hear often enough–not in the Pakistani context, or otherwise, quite frankly.
And if it counts, please do consider Omar Q’s request. I am assuming it is on behalf of a major newspaper (which, of course, will remain unnamed)?
I can imagine the feeling you must be having while sitting through the procedure. Something like being present at a time as history is being written.
As a young kid, I accompanied my father to attend the proceeedings of ZA Bhutto’s appeal in the Supreme Court, albeit only for a few hours. I remember some judges were more imposing than the others, a certain Safdar Shah seemed the most proactive and grilled lawyers from both sidesI was impressed. He was one of the 3 judges who ruled in Bhutto’s favour. Later on, he was targeted by the then government, no surprises there. It was claimed his matric certificate was forged and he was forced to flee the country rather secretly. That was the real dark era of our history.
A few points.
First, and VERY IMPORTANT, it IS Justice javed Buttar and NOT Justice Javed Iqbal who was on teh bench. My mistake… a typo that went by because I was (am) writing on a very slow and unstable connection. My apologies. (Am correcting above).
Second, Omar is right, teh media reports on (and should report on) the events and the news. I have purposely made this MY IMPRESSIONS of the proceedings as a non-expert, non-journalistm, citizen watching the proceedings. I have done so hesitantly because part of me still beleievs that this is too impressionistic (it can only be that). Its like seeing a short clip in the middle of a long movie … you cannot make a judgement on the full movie based on this. You can only say something about the clip. So, anything I say above is ONLY about today’s proceedings and nothing more… some of them may have had a good or a bad day today and I really would urge readers to take this as nothing more than what it is supposed to be. One citizen’s impressions on one day (3 hours) of court proceedings. Maybe Sharif uddin Pirzada will be brilliant next time; maybe the judges will come off as less impressive; who knows.
Third, I am more convinced than I ever was that everyone who can, should see legal institutions in practice. I am sure on other occassions the result could have been different, on this occasion at least I came out feeling good – not because I think teh result will be what I want it to be, but because (at least today) the INSTITUTION seemed to be working.
P.S. (Omar, thanks, let me write to you off-line on this).
@Adnan
There are two judges named Javed in Supreme Court. Justice Javed Iqbal is different person from Justice Javed Buttar. Justice Javed Buttar is/ was heading the bench whose proceeding are reported by Adil Najam