The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday initiated contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the federal cabinet for failing to justify its decision to not assist a U.S. court hearing the case of incarcerated Dr. Aafia Siddiqui.
“As the government has not reverted with the reasons despite being directed to do so, it is in contempt, leaving me with no option but to issue a notice of contempt to the federal government,” read the order issued by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan. “Office is directed to initiate a contempt petition accordingly, in which all the members of the Federal Government will be respondents. The replies of all the ministers, including the prime minister, shall be filed within two weeks from today,” it continued, noting a previous order had warned of contempt proceedings if the government inaction persists.
Earlier this month, the federal government had sought to overturn the previous order in the Supreme Court, arguing the IHC had allowed amendments to a previously settled petition concerning Dr. Siddiqui. The petition remains pending for hearing.
The judge’s order also lamented the IHC not listing the case for hearing, describing IHC Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and the entire “demolition squad catapulted into” the IHC after the 26th amendment. He said his leave schedule was issued after he ordered the case listing for July 21, adding he was informed last week it would not be listed “unless the roster of the sitting judges for this week was amended with the leave of the chief justice.”
According to the judge, he had directed his personal secretary to move the relevant application, but it remained unsigned. “Whether that was by design or oversight, I cannot say for sure, but given the manner in which the roster of judges has been used as a tool for the desired outcome in specific cases, and given the government’s stiff opposition to do what is right and to stand by the daughter of the nation at the critical juncture of the motion before a U.S. Court, I may be forgiven for thinking that it was the former,” he wrote.
The judge further alleged the court roster was victim to the “machinations of the executive,” adding judges were not allowed to hear cases while they were on leave. “This is yet another instance of the reproachable use of the administrative power to shackle the exercise of independent judicial authority, with the likely motivation to pend (until my leave ends) the government’s response with reasons as to why it would not sign the amicus brief,” he wrote in his order.
“However, the imperatives of justice shall not be defeated by such petty means. To the extent I can, I will exercise my judicial authority to the end of upholding the dignity of the High Court and the justice it dispenses,” he added. The bench would resume hearing the case on Sept. 1.