Who will judge judges, judiciary?

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan appears upset over growing public criticism against judges and judiciary during the recent months but ignores what is seriously wrong with the country’s judicial system which has gone from bad to worse and is unable to provide justice to the people.

In his speech at a seminar in Lahore, the CJP though strongly rejected the perception that the judiciary has become part of a “greater plan”, avoided discussing how judiciary itself has actually contributed during the recent months to build up such a view.

Media highlighted some serious issues including how the JIT in Panama case was constituted through WhatsApp calls, how a particular intelligence agency was made to work for JIT and even allowed to tap phones of the PM House, who prepared the media monitoring document for the JIT, who pressurised the NAB’s top bosses to file appeal in Hudaibya case, and why an officer from an intelligence agency met the Accountability Court judge hearing Sharifs references etc. The media reported all these matters but everything went unnoticed.

There are no two opinions about the fact that judges and judiciary should not be ridiculed and disrespected. However, it is also not fair that serious questions raised about the conduct of the judges and the judiciary remain unattended. In such a scenario, the people do ask a valid question as to who will judge the judges and the judiciary.

In between the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif and the clean chit given to Imran Khan, this newspaper reported serious cases of alleged misconduct of several judges including some from the Supreme Court. However, that report was also ignored as if nothing has happened.

The report filed by Fakhar Durrani had said that four sitting SC justices, a recently retired one and 21 serving high courts’ judges were vying for residential plots in the Supreme Court Bar Association Housing Scheme (SCBAHS) at a time when the apex court was hearing the society’s unique case to get a sector developed by the government for a private body in the federal capital.

“What makes the case really unique is the fact that five SC justices, including the retired one, had applied for these plots, were hearing the controversial case of the SCBAHS, which is a private venture,” the report said and added: “The issue becomes further controversial when the SCBAHS got the Supreme Court’s directions for the government departments to (i) acquire the land for the private society, and (ii) develop the sector as well.”

On this story, a revered retired judge of the Supreme Court Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid had commented, “I cannot even imagine what you are saying has really happened. How can they order the government to acquire land for selected few influential people and how can they apply for the plots in the same land.” Yet the story went unnoticed.

Fakhar Durrani says that he has a follow-up of the story, which will help draw an interesting parallel of the conduct of some justices’ with that of some high profile politicians, whose cases have been under SC’s scrutiny recently. But the question is why to upset the judges when such news reports have to be overlooked.

The CJP in his speech acknowledged delay in the judicial process, saying some "not very competent judges" are responsible for the delay, multiplication of litigation and expensive litigation in cases. An efficient training programme is necessary for the judges, Justice Nisar said.

The CJP also raised the question if he will get a chance to listen to the underprivileged plaintiffs of the country once the "political dirt gets cleaned by laundry of the Supreme Court". He added that the judiciary and lawyers will have to make joint efforts to provide cheap justice to the common man, he added.

The CJP statement proves that he knows that our judicial system is seriously plagued and has failed to deliver. Previously people used to hesitate to go to police for help. Now they avoid going to the judiciary to get justice knowing well that it may take years and even decades to decide an ordinary case. No matter what law says about the limitation period of different cases to be decided by the court but in practice even a simple case of defamation takes years, yet hardly anyone is punished.

Government departments even complain about court cases and stay orders seriously hampering their functioning. Pemra Chairman Absar Alam recently told the prime minister that his authority to check media’s violations has been seriously eroded by over 500 stay orders against notices issued to different channels by the body. In return the PM asked him to withdraw all the cases to save the government fee, let the channels do whatever they want.

Of late during the hearing of a case, by Federal Ombudsman, of Park Enclave affected people, who have not been provided plots even after a lapse of six years by the CDA, the CDA senior officials said that court cases are the obstacle in the development of the project.

It is unfortunate that judiciary is today considered a hurdle and not a hope for the provision of inexpensive and speedy justice.