ISLAMABAD: A member of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) on Saturday asked Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali to reconsider and set aside his Sept 29 order of dismissing his appeal moved to seek activation of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) and making public the number of references against superior court judges the council is seized with.

A review petition was filed by Bar­rister Raheel Kamran Sheikh before the Supreme Court with a pleading that the chief justice, being the chairman of the SJC, cannot decide the fate of his constitution petition.

The review petition highlighted that at the outset of the proceedings in chambers, the applicant had raised this plea before the chief justice, but this objection had not been stated in the order of Sept 29.

While rejecting the petition, the chief justice had held that the request made by the petitioner in his petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution was against the spirit of Articles 209 and 211 of the Constitution read with the procedure of enquiry.

“It is respectfully submitted that the chief justice or any other judge of the Supreme Court who is a member of SJC could not hear and decide the fate of the constitution petition filed by the applicant including the questions regarding entertainability, maintainability or merits of the case inasmuch as they form part of the respondent constitutional body,” the review petition said.

The review petition recalled the 2010 case of former chief justice Ifti­khar Muhammad Chaudhry wherein a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court allowed the constitution petition by quashing the proceedings before the SJC, the judges forming part of SJC did not hear and decide the case.

The review petition submitted that the Sept 29 order was allegedly based on erroneous interpretation of the provisions of Article 19A, 184(3), 209 and 211 of the Constitution as well as Rule 13 of the Supreme Judicial Council Procedure for Enquiry, 2005.

Thus, the verdict is contrary to the judgements of the apex court in the cases of 2012 Watan Party and Iftikhar Chaudhry case.

The review petition pleaded that the independence of the judiciary was one of the hallmarks of the Constitution and Article 2A of the Constitution clearly mandated that independence of the judiciary should be secured fully.

It has been observed by this august court in the 2001 case of Khan Asfandyar Wali that it was an essential prerequisite of the independence of the judiciary that there will be a system of accountability.

Thus, expeditious disposal of all complaints/references is one of the basic principles of the independence of the judiciary having universal acceptance, which is also endorsed by the General Assembly Resolutions 40/32 of Nov 29, 1985, and 40/146 of Dec 13, 1985.

Part of the prayer in his petition filed by the applicant seeking expeditious disposal of all complaints/references pending before judges of this august court or of high courts has not been given any consideration at all in the Sept 29 judgement by the chief justice.

Published in Dawn, October 30th, 2016