Achi news desk-
A sense of disappointment permeates some areas within the legal community. Lawyers who had celebrated the shift of the Supreme Court last year as a new era of judicial independence began appear to be among those most disturbed.
It was predicted that the Supreme Court would take a strong stand when it emerged this week that six sitting judges of the Islamabad High Court had written a complaint to Pakistan’s chief justice, revealing repeated attempts by intelligence agents to interfere in the proceedings of the judiciary. , including attempts to spy on, threaten and intimidate judges. Many predicted that the top court would put a stop to meddling in the internal workings of the judiciary, given its recent criticism for “ignoring” the administration’s growing list of violations of laws, the Constitution, and human and civil rights.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court on Thursday gave the government the benefit of the doubt rather than action. With the court’s approval, a commission of inquiry led by a retired judge will now look into the issues raised by the IHC judges. The federal cabinet will determine the composition, constitution and scope of work of the commission of inquiry. Many have questioned whether a retired judge can successfully cross-examine currently serving high court justices and, more significantly, serving generals who can be directly captured. or indirectly liable for the serious misconduct in which their departments have been involved since the publication. Others have pointed to the fact that members of the current administration appear to be either the beneficiaries of the alleged interference of the intelligence agencies in legal matters or, through their ministries, are accountable for the activities of these agencies. So, how can the court expect them to conduct a fair investigation? These are valid concerns.” The CJP said clearly [in his meeting with the government] that interference by the executive in the judicial affairs and proceedings of judges will not be tolerated and the independence of the judiciary cannot be compromised under any circumstances,” according to a press release issued by the Supreme Court on Thursday.
However, the actions of the Supreme Court seem to contradict a more willing stance. The only things the judges of the IHC had asked for were a judicial convention to talk about their experience and guidelines from the Supreme Judicial Council about what should be done by judges who are threatened or coerced by the executive branch of the state. Rather, by inviting the government to take over the investigation, the Supreme Court appears to have thrown the matter out of its hands. This does not seem at all the sort of thing one would expect from an autonomous judiciary that jealously defends its territory. Therefore, another consideration needs to be given to it.
The post Unexpected Obstacle appeared first on Daily The Patriot.
