Who will provide justice to judiciary’s victim?

ISLAMABAD: An aggrieved government servant working under the executive or the legislature has the option of knocking the doors of the judiciary to get justice. But who will provide remedy to an officer who has been working for the judiciary and has become its victim?

To the officer’s credit, his “crime” for which he was initially suspended and later forced to quit has got endorsement from no less than the Supreme Court of Pakistan but yet his appeal against his forced retirement is neither being heard nor dismissed.

This victim of the judicial system is former Additional Registrar of the Islamabad High Court Ijaz Ahmad, who had pointed out the illegal recruitment made in the IHC which were endorsed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in September 2016. Ijaz, the then Additional Registrar in the Islamabad High Court, had shown extraordinary courage by raising questions on the illegal appointments in 2013 but instead of being rewarded he was suspended and retired prematurely. He was forcibly retired in October 2015 following which he filed an appeal before the competent authority. However, his appeal remains unheard so far despite the SC’s decision declaring the appointments illegal as pointed out by him.

The Supreme Court while deciding against these appointments in the IHC, observed, “Before parting with the judgment, we may observe that the Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court and/or the Administration Committee of Islamabad High Court have made appointments in the establishment in complete disregard of the mandate given by the rules framed under Article 208 of the Constitution.”

The SC had added, “If the competent authority itself starts cherry picking by deliberately ignoring and overlooking meritorious candidates in appointment exercising powers under Rule 26 of the Lahore High Court or Rule 16 of the Islamabad High Court, the image of the institution will be tainted beyond repair. Such practice may lead to distrust of the public in the judicial institution of the country. We could not allow denial of justice to those candidates who merit appointment nor could we encourage anyone to bypass transparent process of recruitment provided under the rules.”

As IHC Additional Registrar Ijaz Ahmad had moved a summary in May 2013 seeking internal audit and scrutiny of appointments made from 2011 onwards in the high court. Additionally, he had proposed that appointments made without advertisement and competitive process required to be reviewed in the light of judgments of the Supreme Court reported in 1996 SCMR 1349. Consequently, an audit was conducted by an officer of AGPR, who had opined that none of the officials, including Idrees Kasi (real brother of IHC Chief Justice), were appointed on merit since 2011.

Upon receiving the report from AGPR, the High Court Chief Justice placed Ijaz Ahmed under suspension on January 9, 2014, on the charges that he, while posted as Additional Registrar, had opposed the appointments and thereby had challenged the authority of the Chief Justice. Ijaz Ahmed remained under suspension for 20 months till August 2015, where after he was forced to retire on 20-08-2015. Under the rules and as per the Supreme Court judgement, suspension period should not go beyond three months. The sole reason for Ijaz Ahmed’s forced suspension and retirement was that he had opposed the appointments made in violation of the rules. Ahmed sought review of the forced retirement in the Islamabad High Court, which has still been pending adjudication with the IHC Chief Justice since Oct 2015. The appointments in IHC were challenged in the Supreme Court in 2014, and the apex court, in its judgment in September 2016 endorsed what Ijaz Ahmed had placed in 2013 and ordered the de-notification of the appointments made since 2011, including the appointment of Idrees Kasi.