'Your tiresome clichés do not controvert facts': CJP explains why Justice Munib was removed from key SC panel

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has justified his action excluding Justice Munib Akhtar from the committee constituted under the newly promulgated ordinance amending the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023, empowering him to nominate a judge in the committee mandated to constitute benches.

On September 20, the CJP appointed Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan to the three-member committee, excluding Justice Munib Akhtar, after the promulgation of the new Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Amendment Ordinance 2024. According to the new ordinance, the committee will comprise the chief justice, the most senior judge after the chief justice and a judge nominated by the CJP.

Senior most judge of the Supreme Court Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, however, recently in a letter addressed to the committee secretary questioned the removal of Justice Munib Akhtar. The senior most judge stated that no reasons were given as to why the second senior-most judge, Justice Munib Akhtar, was removed from the composition of the committee.

Furthermore, Justice Mansoor stated that no reasons were given why the next senior most judge was ignored and instead, the fourth senior most judge was nominated as a member of the committee. “Such unfortunate cherry-picking and undemocratic display of one-man show are precisely what the Act tried to discourage and replace stance that was upheld by the Full Court Bench of this Court in Raja Amer (case),” Justice Mansoor wrote.

He also emphasized the importance of collegial decision-making within the judiciary, saying that “the principle of collegial working stands as a cornerstone for ensuring justice, fairness and the larger good of the people who seek its intervention”.

“The concentration of ultimate administrative powers in the hands of a single individual, such as the Chief Justice, runs counter to the ideals of democratic governance and judicial fairness,” Justice Mansoor said, referencing the Supreme Court’s own ruling in the Raja Amer case.

In response to the letter of Justice Mansoor, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa told him that “without ascertaining the facts you allege that I had bypassed Justice Yahya Afridi in the choice of the third member of the committee,” adding: “Your tiresome clichés do not controvert facts.”

While justifying his action, the CJP gave 11 reasons for replacing Justice Munib Akhtar, adding that legally he could not be asked as to why he nominated a judge as the third member of the committee. “Since I have always advocated accountability and transparency, I shall provide reasons as to why Justice Munib Akhtar has been replaced,” the CJP wrote.

“Let it be remembered that this I do because of your insistence, least someone takes umbrage,” the CJP wrote in his letter after giving 11 reasons for his action, replacing Justice Munib from the committee.

The CJP intimated to Justice Mansoor that Justice Munib ardently opposed the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, which had removed the dominance of the chief justice over the Supreme Court.

Justice Isa further informed Justice Mansoor that Justice Munib, one of the judges who availed the full summer vacations, is indifferent to the piling backlog cases and not available to do court work but insisted on participating in the committee meetings, suggesting his lack of trust in the next senior judge, Justice Yahya Afridi.

Furthermore, the chief justice said that the Act (also) stipulates that urgent cases are to be fixed within 14 days but this statutory provisions and constitutional right to seek review was negated by Justice Munib Akhtar, refusing to hear the urgent constitutional cases while he was vacationing.

“Disrespecting those who were his seniors (the ad hoc judges) and selecting 1,100 specific cases and confining them to hear only those cases, something wholly unprecedented,” the CJP wrote, stating as additional reasons for removing the senior judge from the committee.

Similarly, the letter mentioned that Justice Munib was not allowing ad hoc judges to be part of the Shariat Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court to hear the long pending cases as another reason behind the chief justice’s decision.

Giving another reason for his choice of excluding Justice Munib from the committee, CJP Isa mentioned the display of his rude and unreasonable behaviour towards a distinguished member of the committee and walking out of the meeting. The said committee comprised all the chief justices, senior puisne judges and distinguished members of the bar.

He further mentioned that the bench headed by Justice Munib adjourned most of the cases and often finished its work before 11am, a concern expressed by his companion judges.

Likewise, the chief justice, while referring to Justice Munib, said: “Issuing stay order in respect of matters wherein reference is made to him, as in the audio-leaks case. While quick in granting injunctive relief in important constitutional cases, but then not hearing and deciding them, including the two cases mentioned above.”