ISLAMABAD: The head of a three-member judicial commission formed to probe alleged audio clips leaked on social media, Senior puisne judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa, stayed the proceedings on Saturday a day after a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial ordered it to do so.
On May 20, the federal government had constituted the commission to probe alleged audio leaks that sparked concerns regarding the independence of the judiciary. The commission also included Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Aamer Farooq. On Friday, the Supreme Court had suspended the government’s May 19 notification of its appointment, stayed the commission’s proceedings and also stopped the implementation of the commission’s May 22 order to conduct open hearings and make the findings public.
During the hearing on Saturday, Justice Isa cited the apex court’s “judicial order” while stopping the proceedings and said the commission will issue a written order for the proceedings.
At the hearing of a set of four petitions challenging Justice Isa-led commission, Chief Justice Bandial had observed, “I am sorry to say that efforts have been made regrettably, maybe unknowingly, to draw a wedge between the judges of the court.”
While pointing towards Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan, the CJP asked him to convey to the federal government to follow constitutional norms in letter and spirit instead of ignoring Article 175 concerning the superior judiciary.
The top court, later while postponing further proceedings till May 31, issued notices to the respondents including AGP Awan in terms of Order 27-A of the civil procedure code to assist the court.
The CJP-led five-member bench order noted that the alleged audios were all leaks by a so-called “black hat hacker” operating under the Twitter handle “indibell”. The first and primary question was the very veracity, credibility and legality of and authorisation for the alleged audios and the identity of the person or “hacker” engaged in or abetting in such acts, it emphasised.
On AGP’s request to the CJP to recuse from the bench, the order repelled the contention for the reason that it was an accepted and settled constitutional principle, acted upon several times in the constitution of commissions that CJP’s permission had to be sought whenever a sitting judge was intended to be made a member. Since this power was peculiar to CJP office, the incumbent for the time being of the same could neither divest himself nor be divested by the federal government from discharging the constitutional duty. “Prima facie, therefore, the very constitution of the commission is cast in doubt,” the bench feared.
Justice Qazi Faez Isa raised questions over the top court order stopping the judicial panel from working. At the outset of the hearing, AGP Mansoor Awan appeared before the commission and read out the top court’s order before the commission. Upon hearing the order, Justice Isa said: “According to the rules of the Supreme Court, a decision is taken after listening to the parties.” He further said that a copy of the order should be provided to the commission. “The commission was a party in the matter, why was it not heard?” he asked. Justice Isa remarked that the commission was not notified before the hearing. “So how was it stopped from working?”
Turning to the AGP, Justice Isa asked: “Why didn’t you tell the court yesterday that we had already addressed the objections? “I am surprised you did not reject these points.”
