Panama Papers scandal: LHC judge Farrukh Irfan resigns citing pressure

ISLAMABAD: The Lahore High Court (LHC) judge, Justice Muhammad Farrukh Irfan Khan, on Tuesday tendered his resignation saying he was under pressure not to perform his duties in a free and fair manner.

“With much reluctance, a heavy heart and deep sense of anguish, after serving my country and the judiciary for over nine years, I Mr Justice Muhammad Farrukh Irfan Khan, a judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, hereby resign from my office by writing under my hand, addressed to you under Article 206(1) of the Constitution,” he wrote to President of Pakistan Arif Alvi in his resignation letter.

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) was hearing a misconduct reference against him after his name surfaced in the Panama Papers list of individuals with offshore companies.

In 2017, the Supreme Judicial Council had issued him a show cause notice. On Tuesday, a five-member bench of the Supreme Judicial Council, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa, resumed proceedings of the reference. The court was informed that Justice Farrukh Irfan had tendered resignation and forwarded the same to President Dr Arif Alvi.

In his resignation letter, the judge contended that he had been forced not to discharge his responsibilities in a free and fair manner, without the fear of reprisal and as such he had no alternative but to resign from his constitutional position as a judge of Lahore High Court with effect from April 9, 2019.

He said it was unfortunate to say that the Supreme Judicial Council, comprising senior-most judges, which should be a symbol of fair play, rule of law, justice to all, etc, as it was entrusted with the essential responsibility to investigate each and every complaint which was received against a particular judge in a very careful and cautious manner, instead acted in an entirely arbitrary, malicious, illegal and perfunctory manner.

“In a matter like mine where brazen and extremely serious allegations such as money laundering have been raised without any proof, the council should have proceeded with utmost caution and care to obtain material, evidence and supporting documents to back up such heinous, serious, wild and damaging allegations against any person let alone a brother judge, especially one who has worked relentlessly under their control and supervision as a judge of the high court for the past long nine years or so,” Justice Irfan submitted.

He alleged that no prima facie proof or material or documents were filed by the complainant in support of the complaint, and as such it was liable to be dismissed there and then.

He further stated that despite unavailability of any evidence or material in support of these false, fabricated and wild allegations against a judge of the high court, a learned single member of the Supreme Judicial Council (Justice Saqib Nisar) without giving an opinion, recommended to proceed with the inquiry as according to him “some material” was filed along with the complaint, without identifying such material, and wrongly suggested to proceed with the complaint.

“This task was to be undertaken by the entire Supreme Judicial Council instead of only one judge,” Justice Farrukh contended, adding that the SJC had not provided sufficient time to procure affidavits, material and witness, some of whom had to come from abroad and gave only three working days to produce my entire evidence in January 2019, which showed the bias and the predisposition of their mind which was against all principles of natural justice and free and fair opportunity to defend himself, as it had caused serious prejudice to him by filing incomplete affidavits of his defense witness with limited information that could be gathered within the deadline of three days.

He further alleged that the SJC recorded the statement of former attorney general Ashter Ausaf Ali on March 6, 2018 in his and his counsel’s absence, which was tantamount to misconduct, miscarriage of justice and tampering with the record of Supreme Judicial Council thus violating all norms of fair trial, due process and impartiality.