SC adjourns Justice Qazi Isa’s petition till today

F.P. Report

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing of Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s petition challenging the presidential reference filed against him over alleged non-disclosure of assets in his wealth statement till Tuesday.

A 10-member larger SC bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Maqbool Baqar, Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Justice Faisal Arab, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case regarding proceedings of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

The reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa alleges that he acquired three properties in London on lease in the name of his wife and children between 2011 and 2015, but did not disclose them in wealth returns.

During the course of proceedings, Rasheed A Rizvi, counsel for the Sindh High Court Bar Association, said he wanted to submit some documents.

Justice Bandial asked about the types of documents. Rasheed A Rizvi responded that he wanted to submit some judgments of the Sindh High Court. The president and the prime minister had taken oath to protect the Constitution, he added.

Justice Faisal Arab asked whether the president and the Judicial Council could take action on media reports against the judge? Rasheed Rizvi in response claimed that the president did not read newspapers. He said there had been a change in the Supreme Judicial Council as Justice Umar Atta Bandial had now become its part.

Rizvi alleged that the president had not applied his judicial mind as he sent the reference to the Judicial Council on the prime minister’s recommendations, he added.

Justice Bandial said the president had to apply only his mind, not the judicial mind.

Rizvi alleged that the president did not even apply his non-judicial mind. Any inquiry other than the ones conducted by the president and the Supreme Judicial Council would be illegal, he added.

He said the illegally obtained documents had no legality as the superior judiciary had laid down rules in that regard in customs and income tax cases.

Rizvi said the Asset Recovery Unit was an illegal body. The illegally submitted content could not be processed under Article 209.

The Asset Recovery Unit could not get authority itself, and if that was the case then in future SHOs (station house officers) would also start proceedings against the judges.

He said that the president signed the reference and violated the oath.

Justice Bandial asked whether the president could exercise any option other than forwarding an advice. The complaint against the judge was sent to the president by the government, he added.

Rizvi alleged that the prime minister’s advice was malicious.

Justice Bandial observed that the Supreme Judicial Council was an independent body.