CJP gears up judges’ accountability process

ISLAMABAD: Like never before, the Supreme Judicial Council under the present Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali is pursuing the constitutional process of judiciary’s self-accountability.

Informed sources said that the CJP, soon after his appointment as the topmost judge of the country, gave special emphasis to the accountability process within the judiciary and even directed the provincial Chief Justices to refer cases of alleged mis-conduct of judges to the Supreme Judicial Council.

The Supreme Judicial Council, which in the past has been dormant, is fully active at present, and as per the policy of the incumbent chief justice of Pakistan every complaint received by the Council has to be processed.

The sources said that all concerned have been asked not to “ignore” the complaints of mis-conduct against judges of the superior judiciary.

Different cases of alleged misconduct against judges of the superior judiciary are under scrutiny of the Supreme Judicial Council. However, to avoid media speculation as well as defamation of the judges who are alleged to have done wrong but are not proven so by the Council, the media has been barred from reporting the cases under consideration of the SJC.

On November 12, 2015, the SC issued a press release barring the media from reporting SJC proceedings after it was found that certain news stories carried by electronic and print media regarding the Supreme Judicial Council and its proceedings, were concocted, stage managed, false and baseless.

According to the constitution, a judge belonging to the superior judiciary could only be removed under Article 209 of the constitution by the Supreme Judicial Council. The SJC is headed by the CJP and comprises two next most senior judges of the SC, and two most senior chief justices of high courts.

The Article 209 says that if, after inquiring into the matter, the Council reports to the president that it is of the opinion that the judge is incapable of performing the duties or has been guilty of misconduct, the president may remove the judge from office.

Generally judiciary has been facing criticism for ignoring the cases of mis-conduct against judges as there are hardly a few instances in our history where the judges have been removed by the Supreme Judicial Council on the basis of corruption or misconduct.

There have been instances where the judges, against whom strong complaints were lodged, were asked to retire in order to enjoy pension benefits.