ISLAMABAD, June 10: Federal Minister for Law Muhammad Wasi Zafar said on Sunday that a new reference against Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was ready and it would be filed at an “appropriate time, if needed”.
The minister said the new reference was related to activities of the Chief Justice since the filing of the first reference on March 9, and the ‘facts’ contained in the three affidavits submitted by the government in the Supreme Court.
He told Dawn the decision to file a new reference in no way meant the first reference was weak, adding that the new reference had been formulated by his ministry and was being studied by legal experts. A summary of the reference would be sent to the prime minister after the vetting.
He asserted that neither the first reference nor the second one was based on ill-intentions.
“Both references are based on facts and the government is meeting its constitutional obligations,” the law minister said.
He sidestepped a question as to why allegations contained in the affidavits submitted in the Supreme Court by the president’s staff officer and heads of intelligence agencies had not been included in the first reference.
He said there were some allegations which had not been made public by the government for the sake of judiciary’s dignity.
He claimed that the code of conduct set by the Supreme Court was not being violated by the government side, and defended a recent TV interview of President Gen Pervez Musharraf in which the president had told an interviewer that he had sought an explanation from Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry after showing him the reference against him.
“What wrong did the president do,” the law minister asked, adding that the president did not keep the Chief Justice in the dark about the matter.
He said the president could have sent the reference back to the government had the Chief Justice convinced him that allegations contained in it were baseless.
“If there is an allegation against a judge, the Chief Justice calls him to get his (the judge’s) viewpoint. The judge either quits or contests the allegation levelled against him. What should the Chief Justice do if the allegation is levelled against his own person?” he questioned.
He asserted that the Chief Justice had not been summoned by the president and the meeting at the President’s Camp office had taken place at the request of the Chief Justice.
Answering a question, Mr Zafar said that Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz had recommended `suspension’ of the Chief Justice when he had sent the reference to the president. He asserted that rules provided for `suspension’ of the Chief Justice.
“This is the government’s viewpoint, which may be wrong. Let the court decide it,” he said.
The law minister said that the government firmly believed in the authority and freedom of the judiciary, adding that accountability of the judiciary by the judiciary was not only part of the system but also a constitutional requirement.
“Had the present reference not been filed against the Chief Justice, the government would have been accused of being incapable of accomplishing constitutional responsibilities,” he claimed.
He observed that everyone had a duty to respect every decision of the judiciary and refrain from indulging in any activity which could amount to pressurising it.
He said lawyers, bar councils and bar associations should also strictly adhere to principles of a free judiciary, which they claimed was their motto.
Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, the lead counsel for the Chief Justice, when contacted to comment on the government move, said the intention of the government to file a second reference had proved that it had lost confidence in the first reference.
“It (the government) has realised that the reference already filed will not serve its purpose as it is baseless,” he said.
He said the purpose of the new move showed that the government was not sincere in establishing the rule of law in the country, but it only wanted to oust the Chief Justice by any means.
“This proves that even the first reference was filed in bad faith.”
Mr Ahsan said the Chief Justice had done no politics because over the past three months, he had made neither a political statement nor addressed the media.
He said the Chief Justice had addressed only bar associations six times and on `professional matters’ only.
He asserted that affidavits of heads of intelligence agencies were based on fabrication and forgery and were inconsistent with Gen Musharraf’s own statements to the print and electronic media.
“If the government files a new reference, it will expose the government’s mala fide intentions and embarrass it further,” he remarked.
