ISLAMABAD: The resignation of senior SC judge Justice Ijazul Ahsan has left many questions unanswered, as his tenure was full of controversies.
These ranged from supervising the Panama Papers case in the accountability court, hearing almost every case of a political party, facing objections to hearing the Grand Hyatt Tower case, to attempting to shield Justice Mazahar Akbar Naqvi from Supreme Judicial Council’s actions.
Ever since Justice Mian Saqib Nisar took the oath as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Justice Ijazul Ahsan had remained part of every bench hearing important cases. Even Supreme Court judges at that time wrote several letters to the then chief justices on the composition of benches and inclusion of several judges while ignoring the senior justices in important cases.
Several political parties, including PPP, PMLN, and JUIF, openly expressed reservations about the inclusion of Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi. The PMLN particularly raised objections to these two judges and highlighted their biases against the party leadership. The party leadership questioned the impartiality of the senior judge, citing almost a dozen cases in which Justice Ijazul Ahsan gave verdicts against Nawaz Sharif and Shehbaz Sharif.
In February 2023, Rana Sanaullah, the then interior minister, held a press conference and accused Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi of having biases against PMLN and demanded their recusal from the cases involving PMLN or its leadership. However, despite these reservations, they never recused themselves from any bench except the election in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa suo motu case. The then interior minister, Rana Sanaullah, in a statement said that Justice Ijazul Ahsan was the supervising judge in the case against party supremo Nawaz Sharif, and “justice was not expected from him.”
It is important to note here that the five-member bench of the Supreme Court hearing the Panama Papers case was headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and comprising four other judges, Justice Ijaz Afzal Khan, Justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh, and Justice Ijazul Ahsan disqualified Nawaz Sharif for a lifetime. The bench also appointed Justice Ijazul Ahsan as the supervising judge to supervise the trial at the accountability court. The decision of the supervising judge was seen as unprecedented in jurisprudence.
The Panama Papers case also involved a conspiracy of appointing the members of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) through a WhatsApp call. A few handpicked officials were chosen on the directions of the Supreme Court’s Panama bench from various government departments, including Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and State Bank of Pakistan. Justice Ijazul Ahsan gave a verdict against Nawaz Sharif and Shehbaz Sharif in almost every case, including the Panama Papers case, party leadership case, Pakpattan land allotment case, Ramazan Sugar Mills case, etc.
Similarly, in the Grand Hyatt Tower case, the inclusion of Justice Ijazul Ahsan was questioned by the counsels. According to these counsels, Justice Ijazul Ahsan was the legal adviser of the company that built the Grand Hyatt Tower at Constitutional Avenue.
Despite a clear-cut case of conflict of interests, he did not recuse himself from the bench and eventually gave a verdict in favour of his client company.
Recently, a controversy emerged between Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa on the constitution of benches and the inclusion of senior judges in those benches. Justice Ijazul Ahsan wrote a letter to the Chief Justice and expressed reservations about the formation of benches. Chief Justice Justice Qazi Faez Isa responded to these concerns and said Justice Ijaz’s accusations were contrary to the record and facts. “We are paid to work six days, not four and a half days,” CJP remarked in his letter to Justice Ijazul Ahsan after he came to know that the senior judge of the Supreme Court had left for Lahore on a Friday afternoon.
Moreover, another controversy emerged when Justice Ijazul Ahsan, being a member of the Supreme Judicial Council, opposed the issuance of a show-cause notice to Justice Mazahar Akbar Naqvi and termed the SJC action hasty, unnecessary, and against the established legal standards. However, despite his opposition and reservations, the SJC issued a show-cause notice to his fellow judge.
In short, Justice Ijazul Ahsan’s tenure as a Supreme Court judge, particularly during and after former chief justice Saqib Nisar, was full of controversies. From Justice Saqib Nisar to Justice Umar Ata Bandial’s tenure as Chief Justices of Pakistan, Justice Ijazul Ahsan was an integral part of every bench constituted to hear important cases. However, after Justice Umar Ata Bandial’s retirement and the promulgation of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Bills, though he was consulted for the constitution of benches, he complained and wrote a letter to the Chief Justice.
