ISLAMABAD: Moving quickly to pre-empt any possible military action against the democratically elected government, the Supreme Court on Friday restrained state authorities from taking any steps unwarranted by the Constitution and the law.

A four-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk and consisting of Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Justice Mushir Alam, ordered state functionaries to act in accordance with the principles laid down in the case of the Sindh High Court Bar Association, otherwise known as July 31, 2009 verdict. However, the absence of Justice Mian Saqib Nisar in a near-empty Courtroom No. 1 was noticeable, as he had been part of the five-member bench announced by the chief justice on Wednesday.

SCBA president’s petition divides the country’s top legal body

In the 2009 judgment, the 14-judge bench headed by then chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry denounced all previous military takeovers and their endorsement by the superior judiciary and declared retired Gen Pervez Musharraf’s ‘second coup’ of Nov 3, 2007, ‘unconstitutional’.

The verdict also declared illegal the appointment of over 100 superior court judges and sent them packing.

Know more: SC requested to restrain state functionaries from ‘extra‑constitutional’ steps

Subsequently, a new clause was added to the Code of Conduct for superior court judges, in line with the directions of the July 31 judgment. The stipulation forbade judges from supporting any unconstitutional functionary who acquires power in a manner not prescribed by the Constitution.

On Friday, the Supreme Court took up the hurriedly drafted petition of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Kamran Murtaza, who sought an interim order from the apex court restraining state functionaries from taking any extra-constitutional steps.

The current political impasse is adversely affecting all spheres of national life and such a situation may embolden some authorities to take undue advantage of the situation and to resort to unconstitutional measures, the petitioner argued.

The court, however, chose not to close the case and postponed further hearing to Aug 18, saying that the petitioner’s contentions required more consideration. The court issued notices to Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt as well as the federal government.

But instead of appreciation, the judgment drove a wedge among members of the SCBA, with its General Secretary Asif Cheema calling an emergency meeting of the body’s executive committee on Aug 18 to discuss why the petition was filed without consulting the association’s members.

Mr Cheema told Dawn that the SCBA president had moved the petition in his personal capacity and hinted that the meeting might also adopt a resolution against the petition. “We do not wish the judiciary to be arbiters in political disputes,” he said, adding that courts should also have steered clear of the political arena.

But SCBA President Kamran Murtaza brushed aside Mr Cheema’s reservations and posited, “How can the executive committee adopt a resolution against its own president,” adding that in case the worst happened, people should know who was standing with the judiciary, law and the Constitution and who was on the wrong side of history.

The Supreme Court order came two days after the Lahore High Court injunction against the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf and the Pakistan Awami Tehreek’s long marches.

In Friday’s order, the court noted that the petitioner had highlighted violations of citizens’ fundamental rights under articles 9, 14, 15, 16, 23 and 24 of the Constitution.

Published in Dawn, August 16th, 2014