ISLAMABAD, June 7: The Supreme Court on Saturday asked the lawyers to change the venue of their convention as it would not permit them to hold it in the premises of the court, prompting an equally determined stance from the lawyers’ side, who said they would not change the venue.

The convention is scheduled to be held on June 9 under the auspices of the Supreme Court Bar Association to discuss the Legal Framework Order and the extension in the retirement age of judges.

M. A. Farooqi, registrar of the Supreme Court, in a letter sent to president of the SCBA on Saturday, said that it would not allow the lawyers to hold their convention as it would interfere in the judiciary’s business.

The registrar informed the SCBA that there were 45 benches of the court currently working at Islamabad, adding that a large number of litigants and lawyers attended the proceedings on a daily basis.

The registrar said that lawyers should have sought prior permission from the SC before holding such a function — which fell outside the Bar’s normal working — in the premises of the court.

“It is our considered opinion that the proposed convention is likely to interfere with the smooth working of the court, and, therefore, cannot be permitted to be held in court premises.”

The registrar said that he had been directed to state that agencies responsible for security arrangements, in and around the SC building, had been directed to ensure that lawyers, coming to attend the convention, would not be permitted.

Meanwhile, Hamid Khan, president of the SCBA, and Mohammad Kazim Khan, chairman of the executive committee of the Pakistan Bar Council, responded by expressing their resolve to hold the convention in the SCBA office, adding that if the administration obstructed the entry of the lawyers in the Supreme Court premises on June 9, it would be responsible for the occurrence of any untoward incident.

Both the bar leaders, in their separate yet identical letters, said that the registrar had totally misunderstood the activities of bars. They said that the bar premises were meant for activities of the bar and it had been a long-standing tradition that the courts had not interfered in this regard.

“From the tone and tenor and language of your (the registrar’s) letter, it appears that you are planning to interfere and obstruct the activities of the Bar and thus break the long-standing tradition of peaceful co-existence between the bar and the bench,” the bar leaders said.

They said that lawyers, deemed greater guardians of the court buildings than even the judges, “therefore, do not obstruct the entry of the lawyers in the building of the Supreme Court on 9 June, 2003.”

Lawyers, they further said, had always used peaceful and legal means for their protests, adding: “We do not interfere with the smooth functioning of the courts and other offices housed in the court building.”

Similar conventions, thy said, had been held in the buildings of the Peshawar, Lahore and Sindh high court buildings, adding that they had no reason to panic as everything had proceeded peacefully.

“Let me also include a note of warning. If you and your administration obstruct the entry of lawyers in the Supreme Court premises on 9 June, the situation may run out of the control of the bar leaders. If, God forbid, any untoward incident takes place on that day, you and your administration will be entirely responsible for the same,” they wrote.

Stressing the need for restraint, they said that they would ensure peace on their part while the administration should ensure peace on its part.