CJP to chair JCP, SJC meetings today: SJC likely to discuss judges code of conduct, letter of 6 IHC judges

ISLAMABAD: The Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP), Yahya Afridi, Thursday convened the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) and the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on Friday (today).

It was learnt that the JCP would meet at 2pm with Chief Justice Yahya Afridi in the chair. The meeting would deliberate on nominating judges to the constitutional bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC). According to sources, the SJC would also meet at the Supreme Court at 11am with Chief Justice Yahya Afridi in the chair. According to sources, the meeting would discuss various issues, including judges code of conduct. The last SJC meeting was held several months ago under the chairmanship of former chief justice Qazi Faez Isa, in which the code was amended.

According to sources, CJP Yahya Afridi, SC puisne judge Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, along with Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Amir Farooq and Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Hashim Kakar, would participate in the SJC meeting.

According to sources, the matter of a letter written by the six IHC judges to the SJC on stopping interference in the judiciary would be considered. The matter of a complaint against a Balochistan High Court judge might also come under consideration.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had taken suo motu notice on the IHC judges’ letter. Justice Yahya Afridi had opposed the suo motu notice of the issue, written a dissenting note and separated himself from the proceedings. In his note, he wrote that in the present case, one could not doubt the purpose of exercising the power of suo motu jurisdiction under Article 184(3). However, invoking the original jurisdiction of the SC vested under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and that too, on a suo motu motion, should be scarcely exercised, he remarked.

He wrote that this caution of judicial restraint should be further guarded when the matter for determination is inquisitorial, requiring a factual probe before a definite declaration, and/or, direction is rendered by the SC. He stated that in the instant matter, none could doubt the bona fide of invoking the suo motu jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.

However, when the letter of the six judges of the Islamabad High Court craves for formulating the administrative course of conduct for serving judges to not only address any intrusion of the executive in their judicial functions, but more importantly, their mode and manner of interaction with the executive, to judicially proceed in the present proceedings would surely lead to an adverse spectacle – “a sight I seriously urge should be avoided”.

He said in the dissenting note: “To proceed on the proposed action of suo motu would negate the lessons we have learnt from our recent judicial precedents and, thus, we must not be moved into action by public sentiments, no matter how pressing the issue may appear.

“One must also not ignore that the high courts, under the Constitution, are independent establishments, envisaged to regulate not only their administrative functions, but also provide security to and safeguard judicial officers in their discharge of judicial functions. Law on the matter is already in the field. The inaction on the part of the chief justice or the judges of the high court not to exercise the jurisdiction and powers vested in him or them, should not lead the court to super-impose the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.”

The CJP wrote in his dissenting note that the suo motu notice might affect the functioning of the chief justice and justices of the SC and judges of the high courts. “To my mind, it amounts to interference in the independence of the high courts. Given the above, none can dispute that the anxiety of the six worthy judges of the Islamabad High Court raised in their letter dated 25.03.2024, addressed to the Supreme Judicial Council, most certainly warrants positive consideration, inter alia, for inserting appropriate provisions to regulate the interaction of judges with the executive and the remedial response of the judiciary to any attempt or actual interference in its judicial functions in the code of conduct of judges of the superior judiciary, as provided under Article 209(8) of the Constitution.

“And thus, I respectfully recuse myself from the bench hearing the present suo motu proceedings,” he added.