SCBA voices its reservations over legality of judgment

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) expressed reservations over the judgment of Additional Sessions Court, Islamabad to sentence PTI Chairman Imran Khan in Toshakhana case.

SCBA President Barrister Abid S Zuberi and General Secretary Muqtedir Akhtar in a joint statement expressed serious reservations in relation to the legality of the judgment dated 05.08.2023 in Case No. 01/2022, issued by Additional Sessions Judge, Islamabad (West), in blatant violation of the Islamabad High Court’s order dated 04.08.2023, whereby the Additional Sessions Judge has convicted Mr. Imran Khan Niazi of corruption under section 167, 173 and 174 of the Election Act and imposed maximum penalty under the law.

It is truly unfortunate that the Court has decided the case in absolute haste and without affording the accused a fair opportunity of hearing and in the absence of the Counsel for the accused which is in blatant violation of the accused’s fundamental rights as enshrined under Articles 4, 9, 10, 10A and 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

That the judgment dated 05.08.2023 has been passed in utter haste without even hearing the Counsel for the accused on the issue of maintainability of the complaint before the Judge. That the Islamabad High Court, vide its order dated 04.08.2023, had remanded the issue of maintainability back to the Learned Additional Sessions Judge directing him to decide the issue of maintainability afresh.

However, the Judge, instead of deciding the matter afresh, dismissed the application in haste and without any application of independent mind in reliance of its own earlier orders dated 05.05.2023 and 08.07.2023 which had been remanded to be decided afresh, vide the Honourable Islamabad High Court’s order dated 04.08.2023.

The Learned Judge proceeded in the absence of the Counsel for the accused and imposed the maximum penalty under the law against the accused. That such a hasty decision is against all settled principles of fairness, natural justice and due process of law and the timing of such a decision appears to be aimed at excluding political leaders from participating in upcoming elections.

That the historical trend of disqualification and ban of popular political leaders by the judiciary is against the principles of democracy and fair trial as enshrined under the Constitution.

It is pertinent to remember that the judiciary is the guardian of the Constitution and the fundamental rights enshrined therein; therefore, such judgments will only lower the people’s faith in the judiciary to uphold justice. The SCBAP continues to stand with the rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023