ISLAMABAD: Shattering the impression that the term of Chief Justice AR Cornelius was a ‘golden age’ in our country’s judicial history, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui declared that “Cornelius legitimised martial law”.

No one disputed this, however, because it was the view adopted by senior counsel Hamid Khan in his definitive history of the judiciary of Pakistan, which was launched – after a six-year wait – by the Oxford University Press on Sunday.

“Cornelius and Munir had a colonial mindset... they were judges who were anti-democratic,” he continued, explaining how the fourth chief justice of Pakistan had allowed Ayub Khan to effectively appoint judges himself.

This, he said, was the paradox of the judiciary in Pakistan; great people doing bad things and rascals producing favourable judgments.

Justice Nasira says law colleges in Pakistan were not open to women until 1960s

“A young lawyer like me cannot even think of calling former CJP Irshad Ajmal Khan ‘a usurper CJP’, or Sheikh Riaz Ahmed as the one who was corrupt. We all know these things, but he is in a unique position because he can say these things and back them up with arguments,” Mr Siddiqui said, to a wry smile from the stoic Hamid Khan.

The panel for the launch also included retired Justice Nasira Iqbal, academic Ijaz Hussain, and was moderated by Gallup Pakistan Chairman Ijaz Shafi Gilani.

Hamid Khan’s book garnered several superlatives during the course of the session, with Mr Siddiqui first calling it a “highly provocative and courageous” body of work. Mr Hussain, a long-time friend of the author, also described the book as a “rollercoaster”.

He also contributed to the historical discussion, saying that Hamid Khan had described Justice Mohammad Munir’s legitimisation of martial law as the “original sin” in Pakistan’s judicial history.

Panellists agreed that the book was not an exhaustive history of the judiciary, but focused on the history of judicial independence, which was a key aspect of judicial history.

“If Munir had not been appointed chief justice instead of Justice [Abu Saleh] Akram, the constitutional history of Pakistan would have been different. Maybe we would have been spared so many repeated abrogations of the constitution,” said Justice Nasira Iqbal, echoing the views expressed in the book.

Applauding the book, Justice Iqbal observed that Hamid Khan may have made a great chief justice, but doing so would have deprived civil society of his invaluable services.

She suggested that the next edition of this history should have something on the appalling conduct of lawyers since the restoration of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, as well as the Islamabad High Court, which was set up after Mr Khan had finalised the draft of his book.

But it was when an audience member raised the lack of women judges on the benches of the superior courts, that Justice Iqbal’s eyes lit up.

“This is a pertinent and relevant question, especially today when there are vacancies to be filled. This is a male dominated profession, the discipline of law. Even the law colleges in Pakistan were not open to women till 1960 [and beyond],” she said.

Noting that there had been an increase in the number of women joining the bench since 1994, she recalled that several qualified women were kept from sitting on the Supreme Court.

“Khalida Rashid, a very competent judge, who was sent to the international tribunal on Rwanda and she was told that her staying back will not give her the opportunity to become chief justice of the Peshawar High Court or to go to the Supreme Court, both things she was entitled to. Fakhrunnisa Khokhar from our court is another.”

“Unless there is a [woman] in the Supreme Court, there can be no empathy with half the population,” she concluded.

Published in Dawn, April 18th, 2016