Shaukat Siddiqui removal case: SC issues notice to ex-ISI chief Faiz

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) Friday issued notices to former director general (DG) Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt-General (retd) Faiz Hameed and Brigadier (retd) Irfan Ramay on a petition filed by former judge Islamabad High Court (IHC) Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, challenging his removal from service by the president of Pakistan on the recommendations of Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

A five-member SC larger bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, heard the petition of the sacked judge. The court also issued notices to former chief justice IHC Justice Anwar Khan Kasi and Arbab Muhammad Arif, former registrar Supreme Court.

The court, however, did not issue notices to former chief of the army staff (COAS) General (retd) Qamar Javed Bajwa and two retired brigadiers, Faisal Marwat and Tahir Wafai, ruling that they had no direct connection with the instant case. The CJP pointed out that the petitioner had primarily named Lt-Gen (retd) Faiz Hameed, adding that Gen (retd) Qamar Javed Bajwa had not spoken anything directly about Siddiqui. “Then why should we issue a notice to him based on hearsay,” the CJP questioned, adding that there was no direct allegation against Bajwa.

During the hearing, Hamid Khan, counsel for Shaukat Siddiqui, told the court that they had applied to the court praying for impleading seven respondents in their petitions. Similarly, Salahuddin Ahmed, counsel of the Islamabad Bar Association, also informed the court that he had also applied for impleading the same persons in his petition, except for former chief justice IHC Justice (retd) Muhammad Anwar Kasi.

CJP Faez Isa asked Hamid Khan to confirm the truth of the allegations levelled by his client. Hamid Khan replied in the affirmative. The CJP asked the counsel “Who was that [person] for whom these generals were acting as facilitators?” the CJP asked and further questioned why the direct beneficiary was not included when the facilitators were arrayed as parties in the petition.

The chief justice noted that the allegations mean that army generals did not benefit themselves but their actions caused harm to someone else while someone else benefited. He remarked that if those people were supporting someone else, then more people would also get trapped in the case.

The CJP also told Hamid Khan that he had approached the apex court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and “you should keep in mind as to what could happen when the court exercises its original jurisdiction”.

The CJP remarked that the serious allegations levelled by his client [petitioner Shaukat Siddiqui] could lead to significant consequences. “We will not allow use of the apex court for achieving someone’s objectives,” the chief justice remarked.

After reading out points from Shaukat Siddiqui’s speech, the chief justice asked Hamid Khan as to whom these officers wanted to benefit. Hamid Khan replied that they wanted to get the desired results of the 2018 elections.

At the outset of the hearing, the CJP said that a specific allegation had come before them regarding a manipulation, which was planned for elections to keep certain people or certain parties out and benefit someone else.

Barrister Salahuddin, counsel for the Islamabad Bar Association, however, contended that it was alleged that manoeuvring was done within the judiciary by certain military officers to keep one individual out of the electoral process.

The chief justice asked the counsel why he was shying from taking the name. The counsel replied that person was PMLN supremo Mian Nawaz Sharif.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail asked the counsel for Shaukat Siddiqui as to whether chief justice Islamabad High Court had constituted the bench as desired by Faiz Hameed. Hamid Khan replied in the affirmative, adding that General (retd) Faiz Hameed wanted Nawaz not to get bail before the 2018 elections. The CJP asked the counsel about the interest of Islamabad Bar and Sindh Bar associations in the instant case. “If the issue is regarding the pensionary benefit of the petitioner, then the government would give him the pension,” the CJP observed, but added that the petitioner could not be reinstated as a judge of the Islamabad High Court as he was 62-year-old now.

Barrister Salahuddin, however, replied that they had prayed to the apex court to conduct an independent inquiry into the allegations to ascertain the truth and if the allegations of judicial manipulation were proven, then the responsible persons must be punished for their actions.

Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing until the third week of January 2024. The court had directed the petitioner, Shaukat Siddiqui, to array as parties (respondents) against whom he had levelled allegations.

Later on, the petitioner applied to the apex court, praying for making respondents Gen (retd) Qamar Javed Bajwa, Lt-Gen (retd) Faiz Hameed, Brig (retd) Irfan Ramay, Brig (retd) Faisal Marwat, Brig (retd) Tahir Wafai, ex-IHC CJ Anwar Kasi and ex-SC registrar Arbab Arif in his case.

Shaukat Siddiqui had challenged the SJC decision, recommending his removal from service as well as the government notification issued on October 11, 2018, terminating his service. The SJC had recommended his removal from his office for levelling serious allegations against the state institutions, including the judiciary and premier state intelligence agency, during a speech at the District Bar Association Rawalpindi on July 21, 2018.