Six judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) wrote to the Supreme Judicial Council citing interference from the executive in their functioning, and cite examples of coercive attempts by the state to threaten or blackmail. One of the examples cited was the discovery of a hidden video recording device in the bedroom of the official residence of one of the judges.
The Chief Justice of Pakistan responded by first sending the matter to the chief of the Executive branch being complained of, who formed a milquetoast inquiry commission to be headed by a retired judge. After public outcry, that retired judge explained that it would not be proper for him to lead such an inquiry as the issue is one for the judges to deliberate upon amongst themselves.
The CJP then forms a full court to hear the issue, and spends a great deal of time remarking on how this is an issue from before his coming as chief; on how his decision to send the issue to the government was the best; on how he immediately and proactively called the attorney general to ask to talk to the prime minister. He tells everyone that there has been no interference in the judiciary during his time as the chief. He alleges that the retired judge backed out from the inquiry commission due to 'pressure', even though the judge himself has explained why he is declining charge of the commission. Then, he calls for comments from the different high courts regarding interference. Two of the high courts write back detailing the pervasive interference from the executive, whilst another two speak of it indirectly. Then, the case stops progressing. We are told this is because one of the judges is sick.
*****
The Lahore High Court's chief justice nominates several independent judges to head election tribunals in the province. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) decides it is not up to the honourable judge to decide whom to appoint and writes back to him asking for a panel from which to pick judges. This ECP position is challenged in the Lahore High Court, where it is determined that the ECP cannot thus ignore the LHC chief justice, whose jurisdiction extends over the judges who will be appointed.
The ECP used the newly changed law to transfer the petitions pending before the tribunal to a newly constituted one before a retired judge. It does so on an application by the PML-N returned candidates who alleges, amongst other things, that the judge is biased and is 'going too fast'
The CJP then recommends the elevation of the Lahore High court chief justice to the Supreme Court. His recommendation, however, is opposed by other senior judges but it is backed by the government members of the judicial commission and the judge is elevated, away from his administrative position.
*****
In Islamabad, an election tribunal headed by the same judge whose bedroom was bugged, decides it wants to see the original record of electoral forms for the constituencies under challenge before it and directs the ECP to produce them. Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) candidates had been declared the returned candidates from this constituency under dubious circumstances.
The government, led by the PML-N, responded by changing the law to allow for the election commission to appoint retired judges to chair election tribunals, which had only a few years prior been changed to specifically exclude the appointment of retired judges to such tribunals on the premise that they may be more pliable.
The ECP immediately swung into action and used the newly changed law to transfer the petitions pending before the tribunal to a newly constituted one before a retired judge. It does so on an application by the PML-N returned candidates who alleges, amongst other things, that the judge is biased and is 'going too fast.'
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Inasf (PTI) candidates, who have challenged the ECP's declaration of the PML-N candidates being successful, now challenge this transfer of petitions by the ECP and the amendment to the election laws. They argue that this is a malicious attempt to thwart an independent investigation into the electoral process of a constituency.
IHC's chief justice then restrained the tribunal from hearing the petitions related to the three constituencies on July 12, 2024. The judge says he will pass appropriate orders and remarks in the courtroom that he will hear the matter daily and decide it from the next date of hearing (July 22, 2024).
After conducting a series of hearings, the IHC's chief justice reserves his decision on the petition by asking the parties to wait for his orders. This usually means the order will be announced at the end of the day. But in this instance, the wait has lasted for over a month, and the parties to the petition are still awaiting those orders.
*****
The Unfair Means Committee of the University of Karachi determines that a degree from 33 years ago was obtained through unfair and bogus means. The unfair means allegations relate to the retaking of an exam without adhering to a mandatory three-year ban from retakes. There is no explanation as to how this became a current issue before the committee at this particular moment in time. This degree belongs to the judge whose bedroom was bugged and who was heading the tribunal, which was 'going too fast'.
His wife realises he is missing after a few hours and proceeds to her nearest police station to report the matter, where she finds his car parked outside and her husband detained at the station without any reasons afforded
No opportunity is afforded to the judge for presenting a defence during this unfair means process. Thereafter, to consider the Unfair Means Committee's decision, the Syndicate of the Karachi University is assembled on a day when the top court notes that the varsity's Syndicate does not meet as often as it is mandated under the law.
On the day the Syndicate is to meet and deliberate, one of the members publicly speaks out against alleged external influence on the entire process and details the extraordinary way by which it has all come to pass.
The dissenting Syndicate member is 'abducted' on his way to the university where he would ostensibly raise his concerns with other conscientious members of the forum. His wife realises he is missing after a few hours and proceeds to her nearest police station to report the matter, where she finds his car parked outside and her husband detained at the station without any reasons afforded. She raises the alarm on 'X' (formerly known as Twitter), so her husband is removed from the station. We learn later that he was being bounced around various police stations without any reasons being afforded and being told that he was not at liberty to go.
Meanwhile, the Syndicate does meet. Later we learn that it approved, without dissent, the recommendations of the Unfair Means Committee to cancel the degree of the judge who was going too fast.
We are told that the abduction of the dissenting member of the Syndicate has nothing to do with the decision to cancel the judge's degree. We are told this is all a coincidence, and it just so happens that he was picked up on his way to protest at the Syndicate. We are told that what actually happened was that he was taken in for questioning by the police as he was wanted for a seven-year-old case relating to the possession of firearms — charges which he has been cleared from.
We are a young nation, and much of our population is also young. And as Helen Mirren once said, we are all idiots when we are young. We don't think we are, but we are. So we should be.