Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Saturday halted proceedings of the audio leaks inquiry commission led by him in light of a Supreme Court stay order against it, while questioning the validity of the same order.
“The petitioners are telling us that there is an injunction, you cannot hear this [inquiry]. We are not taking further action,” he said, adding an “action order” would be issued later. A day earlier, a five-member bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial had stayed the proceeding of the three-member commission—comprising Justice Isa, Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Aamer Farooq—and suspended the government’s notification on its constitution.
During Saturday’s proceedings—the second since the commission was constituted—Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan informed the commission of the SC’s ruling, with Justice Isa noting that the rules of the Supreme Court required a decision to be taken only after listening to all parties. “I also know a little about the Constitution,” he remarked, questioning why the commission, as a party to the matter, was not heard.
To a question on why the AGP attended the proceedings, he said he had been verbally told to appear before the SC bench and a notice was issued after the hearing. Justice Isa then remarked that the commission was not notified before the hearing. “So how was it stopped from working?” he questioned, and asked the AGP why the bench had not informed that its objections had already been addressed.
Referring to the petition that the SC had heard—which had raised questions about privacy—Justice Isa said the right was restricted to the home. “One cannot peep into someone’s house; however, there are CCTV cameras on the streets, are they also against privacy?” he asked, adding the commission’s work did not breach anyone’s privacy. He also referred to Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Abid Shahid Zuberi, who had filed the petition, noting he had not bothered to appear before the commission.
“Shoaib Shaheen is a lawyer, he is always speaking on TV,” Justice Isa observed, noting the rules barred lawyers from talking to the media about their cases. “Shoaib Shaheen violates the Lawyers Practice and Procedure Act by appearing on TV every day but has come to teach us the law. No problem, teach us; we learn the law every day,” he said, noting he had not bothered to appear before the commission. “Didn’t they have to appear before the court and tell what was ordered yesterday?” he asked.
“Another party has said that he is in Lahore for a medical check-up,” he remarked, referring to lawyer Khawaja Tariq Raheem, adding he had said he would appear before the commission if it held a hearing in Lahore. He then called Abdul Qayyum Siddiqui—the only person who responded to the notice—and said some parties do not have any objection to the actions of the commission.
Referring to another point raised by the apex court’s order, he questioned the AGP on Twitter and the alleged hacker who has been leaking audio leaks on the platform. The AGP said he had little knowledge of the matter and defended the commission, saying it should be permitted to at least determine who was releasing the audios and whether they were real or not. “Maybe these audios were leaked by those in them. If there is an investigation, all [of] this will be known,” remarked Justice Isa, adding there was talk of bribes to a judge but that investigation had also been stopped.
Justice Isa also referred to the apex court declaring that “the subject matter of the reference transcends any particular high court.” Stressing that high courts were not subordinate to the Supreme Court, he noted that the federalism discussed by the 5-member bench had been rubbished by its own rulings. “The Supreme Court annulled several decisions of the high courts; apparently federalism was destroyed,” he remarked.
He also referred to the judge’s oath, noting it called for the performance of duties according to the Constitution and law. “This inquiry commission has been formed under a law—the Commission of Inquiry Act,” he said, adding, “If this commission was not allowed under oath, I would have excused myself.”