The Supreme Court judges on Thursday promised to deliver a “historic” judgement in the case of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry petitions challenging his removal by President General Pervez Musharraf.
“This is an historic case and the judgement will also be historic,” Justice Khalil Ramday, presiding judge of the 13-member full court Bench of the Supreme Court, observed during arguments by government counsel Qayyum Malik.
Malik said the court was seized of a very important case and it had put a great burden and responsibility on the judges of the apex court. Justice Bhuttar said it was no burden but judges were fully aware of their responsibility to deliver justice.
Ramday followed up with his earlier remarks that the sacked Chief Justice case was the fourth dismissal of top judges of the apex court in country’s history, two each by General Ziaul Haq and General Musharraf. Military ruler General Ziaul Haq removed Justice Yacoob Ali Khan in 1977 and Justice Anwarul Haq two years later. General Musharraf removed Chief Justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui in 2000 while Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was the fourth Chief Justice in the line.
Qayyum Malik reiterated that President Musharraf had no option but to pass on the reference sent by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). The Prime Minister had the executive authority to take decisions in consultation with the Cabinet.
Lead counsel of the sacked CJ Aitzaz interjected to ask who took the decision for launching the operation against the Lal Masjid clerics. Malik said he was not privy to that information but acknowledged that the Prime Minister was away and the operation was underway when he reached Islamabad.
Aitzaz pointed out that all senior civilian leaders of the government, including Prime Minister, interior minister, interior secretary and director general of the crisis management cell were out when the decision was taken.
Malik said the SJC had to take decision on the presidential reference. The President did not act mala fide. if a judge was innocent he would be given relief if found guilty he would be removed.
Arguing about bias of a judge, Qayyum delivered his arguments saying it depended on the accused judge whether to take part in hearing or leave the court.
On Aitzaz’s objection that Musharraf did not follow due process to form an opinion while sending the reference, Qayyum said word ‘opinion’ had been mentioned 19 times in the constitution in 12 different articles and in each it had different meanings. He said opinion did not mean any order but it was the basis for making an order. Justice Faqeer Muhammad Khokhar said the executive’s opinion may be based on gossips or unsubstantiated stories.
Justice Khalil ur Rehman Ramday asked Qayyum that if in his view opinion was a baseless thing, to which Qayyum replied no, saying opinion could be right or wrong. Justice Jillani said tahe Prime Minister gave information, to which Qayyum replied that the Prime Minister assessed the information to ensure it was necessary for the President to act upon.
