Justice Isa can move SC against presidential reference

SJC issues notice to AG for starting proceedings on June 14

By Sohail Khan

ISLAMABAD: What could be the possible legal measures, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, senior Judge of the Supreme Court, may take in his defence for the presidential reference filed against him for allegedly not showing his foreign properties in his wealth returns.

As the legal fraternity has extended maximum support to Justice Qazi Faez Isa in the matter and vowed to protect the supremacy of the Constitution of rule of law, majority of the legal wizards are firmly advising that Justice Faez Isa should invoke Article 184(3) of the

Constitution and challenge the presidential reference filed against him on the ground of malice and mala fide. According to international law experts Reema Omer: “ … the court, under Article 184(3), may be moved by any party, regardless of whether the petitioner is personally aggrieved by the violation of law in question. In addition, and particularly in recent years, the Supreme Court has exercised its original jurisdiction, suo motu, in the absence of a petition by any interested party.”

Similarly, the legal fraternity are of the view that there is no legal requirement for judges to disclose assets in contrast to obligation on politicians under election laws. The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), the only constitutional authority mandated by Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan to conduct inquiries into allegations of incapacity or misconduct against a judge of the Supreme Court or of a high court, has issued notice to Attorney General for June 14 in the proceedings to be initiated in the presidential references filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa of the Supreme Court and Justice KK (Karim Khan) Agha, Judge of the Sindh High Court. Former SCBA president Rizvi said that Justice Faez Isa is an upright judge and being targeted for his bold. “I would definitely suggest that Justice Faez Isa must take the remedy available to him under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and challenge the presidential reference.”

Likewise, Zahid F Ibrahim, former additional attorney general, said that there is no legal requirement for judges to disclose assets in contrast to obligation on politicians under election law. Zahid F Ibrahim, who had resigned from his office as additional attorney general in protest after the government filed the references, told The News that law does not require husband to disclose in his wealth statement the property of his wife.