A day before hearing of identical pleas, challenging the formation of a judicial panel to probe into veracity of recent spate of audio leaks, by a five-member larger bench of the top court, the federal government Tuesday questioned three judges’ presence in the larger bench.
On May 20 last, the federal government formed a commission of Supreme Court judge, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Aamer Farooq under Section 3 of the Pakistan Commission of Inquiry Act 2017.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial formed a five-member larger bench to hear a set of four petitions seeking court’s decision on legality of the judicial commission formation and issued stay order over proceedings of the judicial panel till May 31.
On May 26, Chief Justice Bandial restrained the judicial panel proceedings while heading a bench of Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Shahid Waheed.
“I am sorry to say that efforts have been made regrettably, may be unknowingly, to draw a wedge between the judges of the court,” CJP Bandial said during the hearing. Subsequently, the government appointed commission decided to put its proceedings on hold until the SC decided the petitions challenging its formation.
Filing civil miscellaneous application (CMA) before top court on Tuesday the federal government urged recusal of Chief Justice Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, and Justice Muneeb Akhtar from the bench hearing pleas against the audio leaks commission.
The government also urged the Chief Justice to reconstitute the bench saying the judges should graciously consider recusing themselves from the instant petitions. It has been pointed out in the application that one of the rules of natural justice was that the adjudicator should be impartial.
The federal government further stated in the application that the CJP’s inclusion in the bench hearing pleas against the commission, formed to investigate audio leaks “pertaining to a very close family member”, raised grave concerns regarding the appearance of impartiality.
“It is important to reiterate that the questions raised above pertain only to the appearance of impartiality and conflict of interest and therefore are distinct and separate to bias which has neither been raised nor is the contention of the respondent,” stated in the application.
The plea further said that some of the audio leaks also concerned two other members of the bench, Justice Ahsan and Justice Akhtar. “Consequently, propriety and good sense dictate and demand that Hon’ble Justice Ahsan and Hon’ble Justice Akhtar may also graciously recuse themselves from hearing the captioned petition,” said in the application.
“Impartiality requires judges to approach cases with an open mind, devoid of personal interest, external influences, and even a perceived conflict of interest,” it added.
“As the highest authority in interpreting the Constitution and making decisions that can shape the nation’s future, this court bears immense responsibility,” the petition said, adding that judges must be diligent in identifying any “conflicts of interest” that could compromise their ability to render fair and impartial judgements.
