A lawyer on Monday filed a complaint before the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against four judges of the Supreme Court—Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and Justices Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi—accusing them of “judicial misconduct.”
In his petition, advocate Sardar Salman Ahmad Dogar has alleged that the four judges have violated Articles III (a judge’s conduct in all things, official and private, should be free from impropriety); IV (to ensure that justice is not only done, but is also seen to be done, a judge must avoid all possibility of his opinion or action in any case being swayed by any consideration of personal advantage, either direct or indirect); V (a judges should not seek any publicity and should avoid engaging in any public controversy, least of all political); VI (a judge must avoid incurring financial or other obligations to private institutions or persons such as may embarrass him in the performance of his functions); and IX (a judge should always act for the maintenance of harmony within his own court, as well as among all courts) of the code of conduct for Supreme Court judges.
“Even a bare perusal of the recent proceedings in the Supreme Court and the conduct of these four judges, strongly suggest that they have publicly been involved in controversies surrounding their judicial conduct, which is a violation of the Code of Conduct and the Constitution,” reads the complaint, accusing the CJP of “judicial and administrative misconduct” over his failure as SJC chairperson to probe the allegations against Justice Naqvi. Justice Bandial has also been accused of “bench-fixing to favor certain political parties.”
Advocate Dogar’s complaint further accuses the four judges of developing a “majority” to “manipulate decisions” by ignoring references against judges and of being placed on all benches by the CJP in “important matters.” This, he argued, is a “blatant misuse of the discretionary power of the chief justice to form benches.” It adds: “The exercise of this power cannot be without rhyme and reason, and it cannot, most certainly, be used in such a manner whereby decisions are manipulated by the chief justice by constituting favorable benches.”
Referring to the election delay case, the complaint stated that the three-member bench—comprising the CJP and Justices Ahsan and Akhtar—only heard the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) while ignoring all other stakeholders. “This is clearly against the principles of justice, violation of Article 10A, and also judicial misconduct, considering that this has been a consistent practice of the four judges,” it said.
In his complaint, the advocate urged Justice Qazi Faez Isa to chair the SJC meeting in place of CJP Bandial, as he could not head it while under investigation as per Article 209(2). Similarly, the complaint said Justice Ahsan should be replaced with Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in the SJC.