News


November 02, 2023

Faizabad Sit-in: CJP Isa Asks if Electoral Watchdog Is Sincere with Country

Islamabad: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Wednesday asked if the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) was sincere with the country as the Supreme Court took up a set of  petitions  against the  Feb 6, 2019 judgement  in the Faizabad  dharna case.

A three-member Supreme Court bench comprising the CJP, Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Athar Minallah heard challenges to the ruling pertaining to the  Faizabad sit-in .

Authored by Justice Isa years before he took oath as the chief justice, the searing judgement had instructed the defense ministry and the tri-services chiefs to penalize personnel under their command who were found to have violated their oath.

It had also directed the federal government to monitor those advocating hate, extremism and terrorism and prosecute them in accordance with the law.

Adverse observations were also made against several government departments for  causing inconvenience  to the public as the 20-day sit-in paralyzed life in both Islamabad and Rawalpindi.

Pleas were subsequently  moved  against the verdict by the Ministry of Defense, the Intelligence Bureau, the PTI, Pemra, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Rashid and Ijazul Haq.

However, most of the petitioners — including the government, IB, Pemra and PTI — withdrew their pleas, prompting the CJP to  ask  “why is everyone so afraid to speak the truth”.

At the last hearing, the SC had sought  fresh disclosures  from anyone regarding the protest by a religious group that had brought the capital and the garrison city to a grinding halt for 20 days.

Justice Isa had said anybody who was affected by the protest, could approach the apex court to submit affidavits revealing new information but in writing.

In response, former Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) chairman Absar Alam submitted a  statement  in the SC a day earlier wherein he pointed fingers at a former head and officers of an intelligence agency for “manipulation” of TV news channels and explained the dire consequences of not acceding to their instructions.

He claimed that then ISI Director General Major General Faiz and/or his subordinates controlled the policies of TV channels through unlawful means by changing their numbers and moving them to the tail end of cable networks if they refused to follow the instructions.

Today, the bench heard arguments from Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan, Absar Alam, the Election Commission of Pakistan and Pemra.

In an order announced later in the day, the court dismissed review pleas filed by the IB, PTI, the defense ministry, MQM and Ijazul Haq on grounds of withdrawal. It also issued notices to Sheikh Rashid over failure to appear in court and adjourned the hearing till Nov 15.

Absar Alam’s revelations

During the hearing today, Justice Isa said he had some questions regarding Alam’s note submitted to the SC yesterday. “You said there are some rebellious elements in the media,” he said.

Alam responded that “people of intelligence agencies” used to reach out to cable operators. “A Pemra member had received a call which was recorded,” he said.

When asked about the name of the caller, Alam said he could not confirm it because people often called with fake identities. He went on to say that there were petitions against him in three high courts.

“I was removed as Pemra chairman by the Lahore High Court on Dec 18. You said to bring the truth and so I did,” Alam said. “It was known among journalists that whoever filed a petition against me in the LHC is a person of the agencies,” he said.

Alam further recalled that he was given verbal orders to sack Najam Sethi after the latter revealed on a talk show that institutional corruption was taking place. “I was removed for this reason,” he added.

Alam also said that he had written a letter to the ex-army chief after he had received a call.

“If I were the prime minister at that time, I would have held an inquiry or told Pemra to take action,” the CJP said at this point.

At one point, Justice Minallah mentioned that the incumbent Pemra chief said there was no pressure on him, to which Alam said Baig was a “fortunate person”.

“If tomorrow the government forms a commission, will you record your statement?” Justice Isa asked. Alam swore that he would take all the names before the commission.

Meanwhile, the chief justice said the committee should also call those who were accused and give them a chance for cross-examination.

SC rejects govt’s fact-finding panel

At the outset of the hearing, AGP Awan read out the order of the previous hearing.

Referring to Alan’s note, CJP Isa noted that the former Pemra chairman had levelled “serious allegations” on the defense ministry and inquired if the government still wanted to withdraw its review petition.

“If Absar Alam’s accusations are true, then this matter is linked to you,” he told the AGP.

For his part, Awan said a fact-finding committee had been  constituted  on Oct 19 and then read out the notification regarding the same. The three-member committee is responsible for ensuring compliance with directions included in the 2019 judgement.

On Justice Isa’s question regarding who the committee would report to, the AGP said it would submit the findings to the defense ministry. “The report will then be presented in the SC,” he added.

However, the chief justice highlighted that the exercise was an “eyewash” and the “real thing” was missing from it. “When everyone is withdrawing their review petitions, the terms of reference of the committee are synonymous to dust in the eyes.”

At one point, Justice Minallah asked if what was happening in the country today was as per the Constitution while CJP Isa said the government was not qualified to handle the matter.

“A person is imported from abroad and he paralyses the entire country,” the top judge remarked.

He further stated that the court wanted to know who was the mastermind of the Faizabad  dharna. “You have broadened the TORs so much that everyone will be acquitted,” Justice Isa said, lamenting that losses in billions were incurred but the government does not care.

He also highlighted that the TORs of the fact-finding committee did not mention the exact incident being probed. “Our job is to order, and your job is to implement,” the chief justice said.

Meanwhile, Justice Minallah asked who had constituted the committee to which the AGP replied that the federal government had formed it.

“Was the approval of the federal cabinet taken? Was this committee formed under the Inquiry Commission Act?” the judge asked. Here, Justice Isa said that if this was not so, then the notification of the commission was a mere piece of paper.

“This committee too is illegal,” the CJP stated and then asked why the inquiry was not conducted under the Inquiry Commission Act. “Let’s suppose that the committee summons Absar Alam but he doesn’t show up. What will you do then?” he asked.

A committee formed under the Inquiry Commission Act has powers and all institutions are bound to cooperate with it, the chief justice pointed out. “No one will appear before your committee,” he told the AGP.

At that, Awan assured the court that the government would work on the matter.

Justice Minallah emphasized that the supremacy of the Constitution must be ensured at any cost. CJP Isa remarked that when one person gets affected, it makes others mindful of the consequences of doing something wrong.

The chief justice further stressed that the inquiry should also reveal why everyone appealed the 2019 verdict.

“You have an opportunity to get the inquiry done from a person who respects the Constitution,” Justice Minallah said while Justice Isa said it was up to the government to choose whoever they wanted to conduct the probe.

“As per Absar Alam’s statement, all institutions, including the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), are not independent,” the CJP said.

“Can someone go to Canada and return to Pakistan after rioting?” Justice Isa asked. It is not clear who the chief justice is referring to, but Canada-based Tahirul Qadri was a central figure in PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s  dharna in 2014.

“Is this right only for those who come from Canada? Who brought them? Now that you have returned to Canada, tell us … has the work you came for been completed?

“Islam is the religion of peace, they are also defaming Islam,” the CJP pointed out, adding that there was no place for rioting in Islam.

Here, Justice Minallah said the Faizabad verdict was a “landmark judgment”. On the other hand, the CJP called it a “simple order”, recalling that the government at that time, good or bad, was elected by the public.

The SC bench then rejected the fact-finding committee constituted by the government and directed it to form another committee to probe those responsible for the Faizabad  dharna.

For his part, the AGP assured the bench that he would provide details regarding the new committee within two days.

CJP grills incumbent Pemra chairman

Subsequently, the court summoned incumbent Pemra chief Saleem Baig over Alam’s note. When he appeared before the bench, the CJP said Absar Alam had submitted some documents to the SC.

“I have read the report,” Baig replied, adding that Alam had written all that he had witnessed.

“Has this never happened to you?” Justice Minallah asked. “Nothing of this sort happened to me,” the Pemra chief replied.

However, the CJP said Alam’s note had been published in the newspapers. “Take the court proceedings seriously,” he directed.

Baig insisted that he knew nothing about what happened to the former Pemra chairman, recalling that he was appointed six months after Alam left. “Before becoming the Pemra chief, I was a grade 20 principal officer,” he added.

“Are you the head of a dummy institution?” the CJP asked Baig, noting that all the institutions in the country had become a “joke”.

“Tell us one paragraph that Pemra implemented from the 110-page judgment,” Justice Isa said. Rioting and arson, he continued, were not freedom of expression. “Are two TV channels still prohibited in the Cantt area?” the chief justice asked.

Meanwhile, Justice Minallah sought the number of inquiries conducted against cable operators. “You say there is no pressure on you, but whenever people here leave their seats, they say there was a lot of pressure on them,” he remarked.

This is a “common culture”, the judge added.

At one point, the CJP asked Baig about his salary to which the latter said he was paid Rs400,000. “Were you the Pemra chairman when Faizabad  dharna was underway?” Justice Isa further inquired, noting that Baig’s name was included in the case.

He then reprimanded the Pemra chief for misrepresenting that he was appointed later and warned that Baig could be charged with contempt of court for failing to implement the verdict.

Justice Isa also asked that if the term of a Pemra chairman lasted four years, how did Baig stay in the post for so long? In his reply, the latter said he was appointed for the second time.

“On whose order did you file the review petition?” the CJP asked Baig, assuring him that the court only wanted to strengthen the authority and find out who was interfering in its affairs.

In response, Baig said Pemra had decided to file the review petition.

“If you don’t respond, we will issue an order. Saleem Baig  sahib, may God give you a long life but we have to go there. Be brave and tell us who told you to file a review petition,” Justice Isa said.

He also inquired about Pemra’s approval for the review petition. “It was verbal, not written,” Baig replied. However, the chief justice asked how could a decision be taken verbally and then called Pemra’s law director to the rostrum.

“He [Baig] is not speaking the truth, who told you to file a review?” Justice Isa questioned. But the law director responded that he was unaware of the matter.

“Read the law. Can a decision be taken by Pemra verbally?” he said and then turned to Awan. “AGP  sahib, Pemra chairman is saying he doesn’t know about the review petition. Were there some hidden forces that filed the review plea?” the CJP asked.

Justice Isa went on to say that without written notification, there was no existence of Pemra’s review petition. “You are just wasting our time,” he told Baig, adding that none of the previous three governments was pleased during the latter’s tenure as Pemra chief.

The chief justice also highlighted that Baig’s signatures were present on Pemra’s review petition and directed him to take responsibility for his actions.

‘Is ECP sincere with the country?’

When the ECP’s lawyer came to the rostrum, CJP Isa said, “You are an independent institution. Did the ECP file a futile review petition which is now being withdrawn?”

Who was heading the commission during the Faizabad  dharna, Justice Minallah inquired. The ECP’s counsel replied Sardar Raza was the chief election commissioner at that time.

CJP Isa noted that the electoral body had submitted an implementation report. While going through it, Justice Isa asked why the ECP had used the word “ hafiz” with TLP members. He also noted that the report detailed the actions taken by the commission before the Faizabad verdict was issued and sought details of the measures taken after it.

At one point, the chief justice said that there was not a single round figure in the funding received by the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan. “It appears that these funds came from abroad, but there is no round figure of [the funds] after currency exchange,” he noted.

The ECP lawyer subsequently asked for time to overview the matter.

and intentions of the TLP, with a view to foiling their attempt to storm/lockdown Islamabad. - Dawn

Courtesy Dawn

 

Back to Top