The verdict

The Supreme Court (SC) judgment in which the court accepted the review petition filed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa is like a breath of fresh air in a country where such news is rare. It has raised hopes of millions that believe that the independence of the judiciary is essential for a country to survive and exist. The SC has sent a clear message that any attempt to harass a judge for any judgment given by him by the executive and others who consider themselves above the constitution will be resisted by a majority of judges. Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s illustrious father, Late Qazi Isa, one of the staunchest supporters of Quaid-e-Azam, must be proud of his son. The nation has won, and hopes that the country will follow the vision of Muhammad Ali Jinnah who wanted to establish a modern democratic welfare state. One hopes and prays that rule of law and the supremacy of the constitution prevail over the whims and the insatiable greed of a few and that our borders will be safeguarded by the people and their armed forces, bound together by love and respect for each other. We need to focus on achieving economic development and raising our agricultural output. We need to improve our human resource development by investing in science, research, health and welfare of people, instead of building palatial gated societies surrounded by a sea of people living in abject poverty and illiteracy.

Malik Tariq Ali

Lahore

*****

This refers to the news report ‘Supreme Court accepts Justice Isa’s review petition’ (April 26). In its June 19, 2020 decision, a ten-member Supreme Court (SC) bench decided by a majority of 7 to 3 to quash the presidential reference against Justice Faez Isa that required verification of foreign properties held in the name of his wife and children. In order to establish the principle that judges were also accountable, the same decision directed Mrs Isa to provide the money trail to the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to show how she bought her foreign properties. The FBR was also asked to submit its report to the Supreme Judicial Council for further action, if deemed necessary. It appears that Mrs Isa has been unable to provide the required information, in the specified manner, to the FBR.

Now, hearing various review petitions from multiple sources against its earlier decision to refer the matter to the FBR, the SC has accepted the petition with a majority of 6 to 4, declaring that the action taken by the FBR is of no effect. The reason for this verdict is that out of the seven of the 10 judges who had earlier supported the June 19 verdict for further probe, one judge retired and his replacement accepted the petition. On the other hand, other two judges also reversed their earlier decision and accepted the petition. I have mixed feelings about the whole affair which went on for more than a year and kept at least ten SC judges occupied.

SRH Hashmi

Karachi