ISLAMABAD, Sept 10: Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry said on Monday that the struggle for restoration of the judiciary or revival of the democratic order was not over.

“It is a means to achieve the end like the supremacy of the Constitution and rule of law — a sine qua non for attainment of the objectives for which any welfare state exists,” the chief justice said at a ceremony held at the Supreme Court building to mark the beginning of the new judicial year.

“The struggle and sacrifices made by the lawyer community, particularly young lawyers, political workers and members of civil society and the media, will go a long way in strengthening the democratic process and for peace and progress of the nation,” he said.

The chief justice, however, reiterated that the superior courts were empowered to interpret the law and adjudge upon the validity of the acts of the executive and the legislature on the touchstone of the Constitution.

The judiciary, he said, had a primary role in the justice delivery system while the executive and the legislature had to render auxiliary support and cooperation in the administration of justice and execution of the judicial process.

“I feel pride that in recent years the judiciary as third pillar of the state has successfully emerged as a saviour and protector of constitutional supremacy and fundamental rights,” the CJ said, adding that judicial activism of the apex court had not only ameliorated the judicial system as a whole but also enhanced public trust and confidence in the institution.

He said adherence by the apex court to the constitutional norms of equality before law and equal protection of law in all its verdicts had not only curtailed the constitutional excesses of state institutions and private individuals but also curbed to a great extent social evils like corruption, kidnapping, abduction, forced disappearances, target killings, terrorism and violation of human rights.

But, he said, it was not possible to eradicate these social evils without active participation and coordination of all stakeholders in the discharge of constitutional duties of maintaining peace and establishing rule of law.

He was of the opinion that the absence of justice in a society gave rise to denial and infringement of rights of people which in turn led to chaos and anarchy. “When might becomes right, the entire fabric of society is rendered fragile. Resultantly, people are compelled to take the law in their own hands.”

Therefore, he said, upholding the supremacy of the Constitution and rule of law was the only solution to all social evils and economic problems, adding that Islam aimed at establishing a society where there was no-one above the law and all persons, whether high or low, powerful or weak, rich or poor, were equal before the law and equally treated. “This indiscriminate treatment ushers in peace and progress in society.”

Earlier in his speech, Additional Attorney General Habibullah Shakir referred to the apex court’s verdict on Karachi killings and said it was a unique judgment because it explored new frontiers of the Supreme Court’s role in the maintenance of law and order in the country.

“A further manifestation of such role is visible in the case pertaining to Balochistan.”

He said that the court’s endeavours might have been noble in this regard, but it remained to be seen whether or not the course adopted by “our apex court is strictly within the four corners of its constitutional mandate”.

A lot of disagreements had arisen about the purported exercise of jurisdiction by the judiciary under Article 184(3) of the Constitution (fundamental rights), Mr Shakir said, adding that such widespread disagreements tended to make the court controversial and, therefore, in all fairness it ought to exercise restraint in order to preserve its image of absolute neutrality and impartiality.

He said that in his opinion the policy of pick and choose brought judges into controversies and urged the judiciary to apply principles of recusal in line with the code of conduct for judges of the superior courts and that too with uniformity.

Obliquely referring to the Dr Arsalan Iftikhar case, Mr Shakir said although there was no conflict of interest, a notice had been issued to the country’s top law officer to explain his conduct. But despite apparent conflict of interest, he added, judges never ventured to recuse themselves in some cases.

Supreme Court Bar Association President Yasin Azad regretted that the recent appointment of judges to the superior courts fell far short of merit. He said it was not merit which had been a driving force for a young lawyer to reach the bench, but affiliations to the ‘right group’ of lawyers by giving false impressions to members of the judiciary.

“Our disappointment also extends to the representatives whom we have ourselves sent to the Judicial Commission because they were not effective in the commission.”

Mr Azad was of the opinion that members of the Judicial Commission should not be elevated to the bench regardless of their competence.