Haseeb Bhatti
December 14, 2023
The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on Thursday directed Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, who is facing allegations of misconduct, to submit his reply to the show-cause notice issued to him by Jan 1.
Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, the SJC comprises Justice Tariq Masood, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Lahore High Court Chief Justice (CJ) Muhammad Ameer Bhatti, and Balochistan High Court (BHC) CJ Naeem Akhtar.
It issued the directives as it conducted open proceedings of Justice Naqvi’s case after he filed an application seeking the same.
On October 27, the SJC had
issued a show-cause notice to Justice Naqvi in connection with 10 complaints lodged against him and directed the judge to submit a reply within two weeks.
In a preliminary reply
submitted on November 10, Justice Naqvi had cited “serious prejudice” against him and said CJP Isa, Justice Masood, and CJ Akhtar should recuse themselves and not hear the matter.
On Nov 20, Justice Naqvi had
contested the SJC proceedings against him and also challenged the show-cause notice issued to him by the council, stating the initiation of proceedings was coram non-judice and without lawful authority.
Subsequently, the SJC had
issued a fresh show-cause notice to Justice Naqvi, with a direction to come up with his defence by filing a reply within a fortnight.
On December 4, Justice Naqvi had again approached the apex court and
expressed his intent to pursue the constitutional petition he had moved earlier seeking to quash the revised show-cause notice issued by the SJC.
On Dec 6, Justice Naqvi had
invited the attention of the SC committee comprising three senior-most judges to the silence over his petitions challenging the issuance of the show-cause notice (SCN) despite the lapse of time as stipulated in the Supreme Court (Practice & Procedure) Act, 2023.
Justice Naqvi also wrote a separate letter to the SJC secretary, asking the latter to furnish several documents without which, the judge said, he would not be in a position to prepare his reply to the show-cause notice within time.
In an
open letter to the chief justice and all top court judges on Dec 12, Justice Naqvi had stated that the treatment offered to him by the SJC was “nothing short of disgraceful”.
Open proceedings
At the outset of the proceedings, CJP Isa noted that Justice Naqvi had filed an application through his counsel Advocate Khawaja Harris requesting open proceedings.
“According to the rules, an in-camera hearing is conducted to protect the judge,” he remarked. “Justice Naqvi himself requested to open proceedings which was accepted,” he said.
When Justice Naqvi’s counsel came to the rostrum, CJP Isa asked Harris if a reply to the show-cause notice was being submitted today.
“Justice Naqvi has not submitted his reply to the show-cause notice,” he replied. He said that despite repeated requests, the SJC’s record was not provided to Justice Naqvi.
At this, CJP Isa remarked that the SJC could not compel someone to submit a reply. However, Harris argued that conditions could not be imposed on submitting a reply.
“[We have] submitted repeated requests to the council. We require information to submit a reply,” he said, adding that the council did not respond to any of their requests.
“The SJC is a separate constitutional body. You asked for open proceedings and we complied. Now don’t say you submitted numerous requests. Tell us what you need and we will give it. Tell us which documents you need,” CJP Isa remarked.
Advocate Harris said that he wasn’t provided with ex-CJP Umar Ata Bandial’s note and Justice Masood’s opinion on the matter. CJP Isa then directed the SJC secretary to hand over the file to the lawyer, who then proceeded to read out loud the ex-CJP’s note.
Harris contended that the note in question only asked for an opinion on the complaint against Justice Naqvi. “I am reading what I am being told to read,” he said.
At the CJP Isa said: “Don’t say that you are being told to read this. We believe in transparency. You wanted everything to be open and we complied. Now read everything openly. It is not right to say we are making you read.
“The SJC just has one file that was given to you. Now read whatever you want,” he remarked.
At one point, Harris questioned how Justice Masood could give his legal opinion on Justice Naqvi when he himself was facing complaints. At this, CJP Isa reminded him to stick to the issue at hand.
“I want the record’s copy so I can respond to the show cause notice,” Harris said. However, CJP Isa said that the council would decide whether or not to provide him with a copy.
He further said, “Your letters are up on social media before they reach us. If that is the case, then everything will go up on social media.”
“You blamed our secretary for leaking the letter. When we asked our secretary, she said she didn’t even know media representatives,” he said, adding that Harris could be shown the record right now.
“By showing me the record you are forcing me to say whatever you want. Seems like the SJC has already made its decision,” the lawyer said.
He added that Justice Naqvi’s petition was fixed for tomorrow, urging the council to grant his client his constitutional rights.
At one point, the proceedings were paused for a five-minute break. When the council returned, it directed Justice Naqvi to submit his reply to the show-cause notice by January and to also submit a list of witnesses.
However, Harris interjected and said that the SJC could not become the prosecutor. “Witnesses are not to be called by the SJC but the attorney general,” he contended. He further said that there was no concept of “complainants” in the SJC rules and it could only be provided information.
The SJC then directed the attorney general to provide the list of witnesses, and further proceedings were adjourned till January 11.
