Round one to CJ
Wednesday, JUNE 13, 2007
While the Supreme Court on Monday deferred its ruling on the maintainability of a petition filed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry against the presidential reference he faces, it nonetheless commenced regular hearings on his plea. Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, who heads the 13-member larger bench that is hearing the case, said that the question of maintainability of the petition, together with its merits, would be decided later and other similar petitions judged in light of the outcome of the chief justice's case. However, for all intents and purposes, the fact that the Supreme Court already began regular hearings on the chief justice's constitutional petition questioning the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council and its competence to probe his conduct is a moral victory of sorts for the chief justice. It is also the correct thing to do given that the matter is very sensitive and hence any doubts or questions raised by any side regarding (a) the validity of the reference itself, (b) the legality of the forum that is to hear it, or (c) the authority under which it was drawn up and filed, need to be first addressed. By hearing the chief justice's constitutional petition, this will at least be done.
Just to recapitulate, the government's main defence seemed to be that the Supreme Judicial Council was the right forum to hear such a reference and that any action by the president could not be called into question in a court of law, because under the constitution the president had immunity from prosecution and/or lawsuits. The arguments put forward by the chief justice's main lawyer, that the president moved the reference without first forming an opinion, that the government violated the constitutional safeguards set down in Article 209 under which a judge of a the superior courts could be restrained from performing the duties of his office and sent on forced leave and that questioning the validity of the notification for the appointment of the acting chief justice on the same day as the reference against the chief justice was filed are all important and need the attention of the court.
In fact, Monday's developments are also good in that they come amid reports that the government intends to file another reference against the chief justice -- the law minister saying on June 10 that this would be filed at an "appropriate time, if needed”. Such a choice and use of words seems to suggest that the government will use this as a kind of threat or warning to the chief justice to bring him under further pressure. The minister has said that this second reference will be based on the activities of the chief justice since March 9 and on what he terms are the "facts” contained in the three counter-affidavits filed with the Supreme Court by the director-general of Military Intelligence, the director of the Intelligence Bureau and the president's chief of staff. Filing a second reference will be counterproductive and only serve to reinforce the public perception that the government wants to remove the chief justice by any means necessary. Besides, it may also reflect a thinking among some in the government that perhaps the reference that has been filed does not carry enough merit and needs to be supplemented by another. Furthermore, the law minister has said that "legal experts” are still being consulted on the finer points of the second reference under consideration. Then why talk about it beforehand, when, in the minister's own words, it is still being vetted? Is the purpose to scare the chief justice in particular and the superior judiciary in general? The government should allow the Supreme Court to carry on with what it is doing and should forget about filing any more references. One can only wonder when the government's penchant for continuing on a confrontational path with various institutions will subside -- that is when a semblance of stability and certainty will return and the government's own credibility -- currently at an all-time low -- will improve.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=60254