ISLAMABAD: Former attorney general for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan on Saturday explained that he wanted a proper inquiry into the serious allegations levelled by Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, though he was unaware of any previous government letter in this regard.

Mr Khan said he, as the then first law officer, and not Anwar Mansoor, had furnished a letter dated June 10, 2021 before the Supreme Court in connection with Justice Siddiqui’s case.

In a statement issued to Dawn, the former principal law officer said he had allowed the letter to be filed before the SC on behalf of the government to trigger a proper inquiry into the serious allegations levelled by Justice Siddiqui against army officers as they warranted full probe, mentioning that he was unaware of any previous government letter, dated July 24, 2018.

On Friday, a five-judge SC bench ruled that Justice Siddiqui would be deemed to have retired, and was entitled to receive all the benefits and privileges due to a retired high court justice, setting aside the recommendation of Supreme Judicial Council and a subsequent notification about Justice Siddiqui’s removal.

The SJC had earlier held that while addressing the Rawalpindi District Bar Association on July 21, 2018, Justice Siddiqui had not only violated some express provisions of the code of conduct but also displayed conduct unbecoming of a judge. Justice Siddiqui, in a fiery speech, had made remarks against the alleged role of certain officers of the executive organ of the state, specifically ISI, in the affairs of the judiciary.

Khalid Jawed says he as the then first law officer, and not Anwar Mansoor, furnished a letter before apex court in this regard

The ex-AGP’s explanation came against the backdrop of paragraph 31 of the SC judgement, which held that the government through its July 24, 2018 letter wanted that the veracity of the allegations be determined but three years later a ‘statement on behalf of the federal government’ was filed on June 10, 2021 asserting that ‘as specific allegation about certain state officers were made in the petition and read out in the court, on instructions, it is placed before the SC that the allegations made were baseless, misleading and, therefore, denied.’

The statement that was filed by the AGP office in June 2021 contradicted the previous letter of the government, the judgment mentioned. The irreconcilable contradiction was not reconciled by the AGP nor was it disclosed how it had been ascertained that the allegations were baseless, the judgement regretted, adding “Anwar Mansoor Khan” who was then the AGP had undermined his credibility by his own conduct. And the SJC was also apparently misled by AGP’s understanding of the law, in contending that the SJC could go beyond the provisions of the code of conduct to determine what constitutes misconduct by a judge.

The judgement noted that the SJC in its opinion wrote, “We have found the AGP to be quite correct in submitting that it has been made obvious by the code of conduct itself that the code is not exhaustive of the traits and patterns of behaviour of a judge of the superior judiciary.”

Now in the statement, ex-AGP Khan said that the fact was that the appeal was filed while he was AGP and his view was and remains that this should be probed and truth must come out. However, the inquiry was not conducted before he could be heard by the court as AGP and then he left the office. It was after reading this judgement that “I have discovered that the federal government as well as the then COAS had requested such an inquiry in 2018,” the former AGP said.

Such documents were not available at AG office file and never mentioned during any proceedings, he said, adding this reiterated the need for probe without which this issue could perhaps not be logically concluded.

Published in Dawn, March 24th, 2024