PCO judges cases: SCBA divides over court's decision

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) is divided over the apex court's decision for initiating proceedings against PCO judges by framing contempt charges against them on February 21. Twelve executive members of SCBA, who are associated with Hamid Khan group on Thursday welcomed the apex court's decision regarding PCO judges and termed it as historic.
They also criticised its SCBA president Asma Jahangir to refrain from passing any derogatory remarks regarding apex court's February 2 judgement on PCO judges. She should not express her personal views under the garb of SCBA, they demanded. The SCBA president has said on Wednesday that the apex court decision for giving contempt notices on serving judges of superior courts would weaken the judiciary. She has said it never happened in the judicial history of the country that sitting judges were prosecuted for court contempt. She was not inclined to give nod to the apex court verdict of framing charges against PCO judges for taking oath under PCO on November 3, 2007.
SCBA executive member Aslam Ghumman told reporters that 12 SCBA executive members held a meeting on Thursday and appreciated apex court verdict on PCO judges for initiating contempt proceedings against them, who violated the court's November 3, 2007 order and took oath under PCO. He said that members of Hamid Khan group would take up the issue in SCBA executive body meeting on February 11 that how could she express her personal views in the garb of SCBA.
Ghumman said that SCBA president had already lost majority in executive body after election of new SCBA executive member Younis Khan Nohal last week. He said that Hamid Khan group would not allow SCBA president to change the counsels in 18th amendment case.
Expressing their views, Hamid Khan groups' members were of the view that every individual who supported dictatorship should be brought before the justice. "The sacrifices rendered by lawyers, civil society, media and other people could not be defeated," they maintained.
They also said that the court's recent judgement reflected that no body was above the law and constitution. They said that the judges who took oath under Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) had supported the dictatorship and they were not eligible to remain as judges of the court especially, when they were bared to take oath under PCO by a seven-member bench of the apex court.