ISLAMABAD, May 5: Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry in a statement submitted to the Supreme Court on Saturday denied a government claim that addressing bar councils and associations by him amounted to leading political rallies or making political speeches.
It is rejoinder to the government’s reply to his petition against the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council, on which a five-member bench will commence hearing on Monday.
The chief justice said in the statement that he had always acted with judicial restraint even in the present trying times, upheaval and public outcry against his suspension from the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan by President Pervez Musharraf, followed by the filing of a reference against him in the SJC.The petitioner should not be blamed if political personalities were as agitated as lawyers and the people at large at the conduct of the president, the rejoinder said.
While there was no bar on meeting any citizen, the petitioner only showed the courtesy of meeting people who came to his residence, it said.
On the question of exploiting the media, the rejoinder accused the government, its ministers, chief ministers and public relations and information departments of starting a media blitz against the petitioner by employing scores of officials and enormous resources. “When the media began to show the reality, which was totally contrary to government’s statements, the government began to shout foul.”
The rejoinder said the government itself had organised a rally outside the Supreme Court, which was led by PML president Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and federal ministers, and questioned how the respondents (president and the federal government) could then complain of media exploitation. Neither the petitioner nor his counsel had any resources to match those by which a vilification campaign had been undertaken against the petitioner and his counsel, it said.
On the allegation of personal bias levelled by the petitioner against three members of the SJC in his main petition, the chief justice denied allegations relating to scandalising any judge but explained that when a member was disqualified on account of personal interest, there was no question of being able to sit or decide about the bias against him.
The petitioner emphasised that he was never incapable of performing his functions, therefore the oath of Acting Chief Justice Rana Bhagwandas was illegal.
On the government’s request to set up a full court, the petitioner said the application had merely been moved to put pressure on the court. “There is no question of seniority among judges while deciding cases or in the constitution of the benches.” Any judge, irrespective of seniority, could disagree with his seniors on a bench and even with the chief justice, he said.
Citing the 1996 Al-Jihad Trust case, the petitioner sought interim relief by staying the proceedings of the SJC hearing the reference against him.
