ISLAMABAD: Following the intervention of the Pakistan Information Commission (PIC), the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has conveyed to the PIC through the Law Ministry that none of its sitting judges have applied for any plot from any government authority. However, queries from the PIC seeking similar information from the apex court remain unanswered.
In another case, a citizen had sought from the apex court information about the SC’s employees. But despite the order of the PIC, the Registrar of the Supreme Court insists that the required information cannot be provided under the law and the order passed by the PIC is “absolutely without jurisdiction” and against the Constitution of Pakistan.
“Only information which tends to erode the independence of the judiciary is withheld, not to avoid scrutiny or to shut out transparency but in the larger interest of the public for enforcing the fundamental right to due process of law and access to justice,” said the SC Registrar. He added that the jurisdiction of the Commission does not extend to the SC.
In contrast, the IHC Registrar did not question the jurisdiction of the Commission and responded to the questions seeking information. In response to the SC Registrar’s view, the Commission, however, noted: “The Commission is of the view that the exercise of constitutional and statutory right of citizens in matters of public importance through the Act is neither likely to, nor designed to, curtail independence of the superior judiciary. This Commission also believes that exercise of the constitutional right of access to information in matters of public importance through the act cannot be equated with executive oversight of the superior judiciary.”
Against this order of the PIC, the Registrar through the Law Ministry has filed a review petition seeking that the PIC reverse its decision. In one of its orders, the PIC had directed the Law Ministry to provide all notifications pertaining to; i) the perks and privileges of the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court and Islamabad High Court, ii) Pension and post retirement benefits of the chief justice and judges of the SC and IHC, iii) Plots allotted in any scheme administered by the government or a state owned or controlled statutory body, foundation, company or agency received by the chief justice and judges of the SC and the IHC.
The Registrar IHC in his response to the PIC order through the law ministry conveyed that neither the incumbent CJ IHC nor any sitting judge of the high court have applied to any government authority or any other agency for the allotment of a plot. None of these judges has been allotted any plot either. The IHC, however, did not share the information about the allotment of plots to former judges of the high court.
The IHC Registrar said, “It is noted that the perks and privileges of the honorable chief justice and honorable judges of the High Court are governed under the Presidential Order issued by the competent authority in exercise of powers conferred under Article 205 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. All the Presidential Orders related to the perks and privileges of the honorable chief justice and honorable Judges are public documents and also available on the official website of this Court (www.ihc.gov.pk). The said Presidential Order also includes information regarding the pension and post-retirement benefits of honorable chief justice and honorable judges of this court.”
In the case of the former CJ and judges of the IHC, the Registrar said that the information regarding allotment of plots by a government authority or any other government agency is personal to their lordships. He advised that such information may be obtained from the retired judges, if required.
While the PIC did not receive anything from the Law Ministry regarding the allotment of plots to SC judges during the last five years, the Registrar did respond through the ministry to the PIC’s order regarding the provision of information about SC employees.
The information sought was:
a) Total sanctioned strength of staff members of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (category-wise) against different positions/pay-scales i.e. from pay scale 1 to 22.
b) Total vacancies in the Supreme Court of Pakistan against different pay-scales/positions; and dates since which these positions have been lying vacant.
c) Number of staff members who are not regular but have been engaged on daily wage basis or through short-term or long-term contracts against various positions.
d) Number and types of positions created anew since January 1, 2017.
e) Total number of female staff members against various positions.
f) Total number of persons with disabilities working with the Supreme Court of Pakistan against various positions.
g) Total number of transgender persons working with Supreme Court of Pakistan against various position.
h) A certified copy of the latest approved Service Rules of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
The SC Registrar questioned the PIC’s jurisdiction and declined to provide the information sought insisting that the Commission’s order is unconstitutional and against the independence of the judiciary.
