Talal convicted for contempt

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday convicted former minister of state for interior Talal Chaudhry over his contemptuous speeches made in public on September 24 and 27, 2017 and sentenced him with imprisonment till the rising of the court and with fine of Rs0.1 million.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Faisal Arab, announced a reserved verdict in suo motu contempt proceedings initiated against Talal Chaudhry on account of derogatory and contemptuous speeches at public gatherings against the apex court, telecast by different TV channels.

“For all the above reasons, we are satisfied that the alleged contemner has committed contempt of court within the meaning of Article 204 of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 and made himself liable for punishment,” the court held in its verdict.

The court convicted and sentenced Talal Chaudhry under sections 3 & 5 of the Ordinance, 2003 and punished him with imprisonment till the rising of the court and with fine of Rs100,000.

Talal Chaudhry's punishment lasted for a little over two hours as he remained confined inside the Courtroom No.3 since the bench continued hearing cases and even took a tea break in between. His punishment was over once the bench concluded hearing cases.

The court on March 15 indicted Talal Chaudhry over his contemptuous speeches made on September 24 and 27, 2017 at public gatherings.

During his speech at a PML-N rally in Jaranwala in January 2018, Chaudhry had said: "There was an era when the Ka’abah was full of idols. Today, the judiciary, which is the country's highest institution, is also full of PCO [Provisional Constitution Order] idols."

In the same speech, Chaudhry said: "Mian Nawaz Sharif threw them out, threw him out of the court. They will not give justice but will continue their injustices."

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar on February 1 took notice of the contemptuous speeches and later on issued him a show cause notice on February 6. Later on, after conducting proceedings and recording witnesses of both the prosecution and defence, the court reserved the judgment on July 11, 2108. The court had directed Talal Chaudhry to ensure his presence at the time of announcement of the judgment which he complied with and was present in the courtroom along with his counsel Kamran Murtaza.

Legal experts are of the view that after the verdict of the apex court, legal observers believe that Chaudhry stands disqualified from contesting elections for five years under Article 63(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Article 63(1) (g) states, "A person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen a member of Parliament if he has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for propagating any opinion or acting in any manner prejudicial to the ideology of Pakistan, or the sovereignty, integrity or security of Pakistan, or the integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan or which defames or brings into ridicule the judiciary or the armed forces of Pakistan."

“We have closely looked and examined the two transcripts of speeches made by the alleged contemnor and apparently find that such utterances of the alleged contemnor, amounted to abuse of court and to scandalise the court or tends to bring the court or a judge of the court into hatred, ridicule or contempt within the meaning of Article 204 of the Constitution and further such contempt in terms of Section 18 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 was substantially detrimental to the administration of justice in that it scandalised the court and tended to bring the court or a judge of the court into a hatred or ridicule”, the court ruled.

The judgment authored by Justice Gulzar Ahmed ruled that as regards the submission of the learned Sr ASC for the alleged contemnor that the court ought to show judicial restraint, it has gone through the judgment cited by him and are of the view that these are not of much help to the alleged contemnor as the principle of judicial restraint is not a universal principle to be applied in each and every case as each and every case is based upon its own different facts, which in law are required to be dealt with in the peculiar facts and circumstances at their own case.

“The alleged contemnor in his two speeches in order to show his unfaltering allegiance to Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, who as Prime Minister of Pakistan and was ousted from office by the judgment rendered by this court in the Panama case has uttered words seriously prejudicing the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the judges of this court and ultimately the whole court as an institution and his utterances were not at all or within the ambit of the decency, morality and decorum but showed utter venom for which he himself has no cause of his own, the verdict held.

The court further observed that the alleged contemnor in his two speeches has not only abused the judges of this court but has scandalised the court and did everything to bring the court into hatred, ridicule and contempt, which is substantially detrimental to the administration of justice and scandalises the court and tends to bring the court and judges of the court into hatred and ridicule.

“For all the above reasons, we are satisfied that the alleged contemnor has committed contempt of court within the meaning of Article 204 of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 and made himself liable for punishment thus he is convicted and sentenced under Sections 3 & 5 of the Ordinance, 2003 and punished with imprisonment till the rising of the court with fine of Rs100,000”, the court ruled and disposed of the contempt proceedings.

Talal Chaudhry, a firebrand and active PML-N leader remained more popular during the Panama case as he used to defend PML-N government and its leaders on TV screens. Recently he had contested the general election from NA-102 Faisalabad II but lost to PTI candidate.

Talal Chaudhry is the third PML-N leader convicted in a contempt of court case after Nehal Hashmi and former privatization minister Daniyal Aziz, who were also declared ineligible for contesting elections as a direct result of the conviction.