Letter inquiry

Published
0

THERE has been a twist in the tale. After the Supreme Court last week deferred to the federal cabinet, asking it to deal with a disturbing letter six Islamabad High Court justices had addressed to the chief justice, observers had worried that a government-sponsored inquiry into intelligence operatives’ alleged interference in judicial affairs would prove to be a non-starter.

Even as voices from within the legal community were still criticising the Supreme Court for neglecting its responsibility and ceding full control over the inquiry to the government, a respected former judge, retired chief justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, was duly appointed to head the inquiry commission tasked with looking into the judges’ letter.

By Monday, however — following an open statement from more than 300 lawyers, amidst whispers that the six IHC justices may be considering directly petitioning the Supreme Court, and a polite ‘no, thank you’ from Mr Jillani — the scheme seemed to have fallen apart.

Accepting demands that the letter be taken up by the Supreme Court under its jurisdiction defined in Article 184(3), Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa announced on Monday that his court had taken suo motu notice of the matter. A seven-member bench will take the case up for hearing tomorrow. Although some concerns regarding the size and composition of the bench have been raised by certain quarters, the development is a breakthrough for the legal community and is being seen as a positive step.

It is hoped that the court will now arrange for the proceedings to be broadcast live, as in past important cases. The issues raised by the six justices of the Islamabad High Court have caused quite a sensation, and it would, therefore, be in the public interest if they are also addressed transparently.

The legal community deserves much credit for refusing to accept a compromise in the form of an inquiry commission and pushing for the letter to be taken up by the Supreme Court.

Mr Jillani’s well-reasoned refusal to sit in inquiry over six serving justices also deserves commendation. The former chief justice of Pakistan, while thanking the government for its consideration, courteously pointed out that since the letter had been addressed to the Supreme Judicial Council and its chairman, it would be improper of him to interfere in an institutional matter. He also objected to the inquiry’s terms of reference, as set by the government, noting that they did not seem relevant to the issue raised in the judges’ letter, namely, a consultation on what judges must do when they are placed under duress.

In doing so, Mr Jillani greatly strengthened the argument that others had been making: the judiciary must address this issue internally. One now hopes it will do so enthusiastically.

Published in Dawn, April 2nd, 2024

Opinion

Editorial

Muddled hierarchy
Updated 15 Nov, 2026

Muddled hierarchy

The jurisdiction of the two courts and a mechanism for settling disputes between them should be spelt out in law, not left to judges to fight over.
Growing crisis
15 Nov, 2026

Growing crisis

AN emergency can be judged by the speed with which it draws an effective response. The National Population Council’s...
Organised rackets
15 Nov, 2026

Organised rackets

ON the International Day against Transnational Organised Crime, observed today, Pakistan finds itself in a tight...
Referendum talk
Updated 14 Nov, 2026

Referendum talk

Unless the PPP is deliberately using Sindh as a bargaining chip, it should issue a clarification with a clear, consistent position on new administrative units, not one tailored to protect its home turf.
Mineral wealth
Updated 14 Nov, 2026

Mineral wealth

Minerals should not be presented as a solution to Pakistan’s long-term economic difficulties. The aim should be to build an industrial base rather than export raw materials.
Late diagnosis
14 Nov, 2026

Late diagnosis

AS we mark World Diabetes Day today, Pakistan faces a troubling question: how many people are living with diabetes...