Judge’s video, affidavit lead to a raft of questions

ISLAMABAD: An elaborate affidavit submitted by Judge Arshad Malik with the acting chief justice of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has raised more questions than answers. Its close reading throws up several questions.

The judge admits that he was blackmailed by his personal “Multan video” for a long time, and he kept succumbing to their demands of meeting various persons.

But the question is: Can an affidavit, not supported by any documentary evidence, neutralise the taped conversation? Only in case of an investigation or hearing on the affidavit in the IHC during Nawaz Sharif’spending appeal, witnesses can be required to be produced by Judge Arshad Malik. The persons named in the paper can be summoned in such inquiry. According to the affidavit, the saga started “shortly after my appointment in February, 2018” as judge of the accountability court.

Thus it began at the start of his tenure as the accountability judge. It continued for the next 16 months, the last meeting having been held between the judge and Hussain Nawaz on June 1 this year in Madina. The judicial officer delivered his judgements in the two references on December 24, 2918.The affidavit, which was filed a week after the release of purported video of the judge by Maryam Nawaz, reveals that Arshad Malik was told by two acquaintances--Mahar Jilani and Nasir Janjua--that he has been made accountability judge on their recommendation.

Did Arshad Malik approach authorities concerned with the request to transfer him as an influential party has managed his posting and he will not be able to dispense justice in these references? As per the released audio-video, Arshad Malik was blackmailed and coerced into sentencing Nawaz Sharif. He stated in the affidavit that he was also blackmailed by his personal “Multan video”.

In both cases, he was bullied by the tapes. A leading question that has been asked by many is: Did the judge bring a raft of threats, offers of bribe, intimidation and blackmail to the notice of the IHC chief justice or the monitoring justice of the Supreme Court or both? The affidavit didn’t say it was. Why did the judge keep meeting different persons pinpointed in the document despite serious warnings and threats to physically harm him? Did he ever confront Nawaz Sharif, who appeared before him for umpteen times, with the threats he was receiving?

The document discloses that on various occasions the judge met at least eight persons--Nawaz Sharif, Hussain Nawaz, Nasir Butt, Mahar Jilani, Nasir Janjua, Khurram Yousuf, and Mian Tariq and his son--who discussed the references being heard by him and even after they had been decided.

Did he ever refuse to see anyone of them? The affidavit didn’t say he ever declined to oblige. Did the judge follow the conduct of conduct for judicial officers that bars them from privately or openly meeting accused persons particularly those whose cases they are hearing?

The judge said in the document that he was “approached on a number of occasions by associates and supporters” of Nawaz Sharif with “demands, inducements and threats to acquit” him. But he did not prefer to report this to the IHC. Arshad Malik claimed that he was offered bribes at least for four times. Why did he keep quiet over this illegality? This drama, as per the affidavit, continued with ferocity throughout the trial of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif till his conviction by Arshad Malik, and even after the judgements were handed down in the two references.

Did a judge ever furnish points to a person convicted by him attacking his own judgement that should be raised in appeal? Did Arshad Malik leave some loopholes in his verdicts that could benefit the convicts in appeal? Has it ever happened before? Arshad Malik stated that he “agreed to this demand [of Nasir Butt to provide points] in the background of blackmailing to which I was being subjected.” Generally given the high-profile Nawaz Sharif enjoys because of his politics, how did the judge’s meeting with him at Jati Umra “probably”on April 6 this year, claimed by Arshad Malik, remained hidden from all eyes and ears?

The day of session noted by Arshad Malik falls in the six weeks when Nawaz Sharif was on bail granted by the Supreme Court on March 26.What was the point in “accompanying Nasir Butt” to meet the former prime minister, as claimed by the judge, just to satisfy him when the judicial officer was sick and tired of their aggression and bullying?

As Maryam Nawaz released the judge’s audio-video recording, the government stoutly rejected it terming it fake and doctored. After a couple of days, it announced that it has nothing to do with the leak and it is for the judiciary to adjudge it. Prime Minister Imran Khan offered to provide all facilities to the judiciary to ascertain its veracity. After the IHC chief justice wrote to the federal law ministry to withdraw Arshad Malik as the accountability judge, the government changed its trajectory and offered an aggressive defence of the judicial officer’s assertions narrated in the affidavit.