The superior court judges facing contempt charges for taking oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) on Thursday shifted the blame to former President Pervez Musharraf, pleading for initiation of proceedings against him under charges of high treason and hang him for the unconstitutional steps of November 3, 2007.
Musharraf had imposed emergency rule and suspended the Constitution on November 3, 2007. Dr Abdul Basit, a counsel for justice Hasnat Ahmed Khan and Justice Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi - two PCO judges of Lahore High Court (LHC), during his arguments pleaded before the Supreme Court to initiate proceedings against Pervez Musharraf on charges of high treason.
"Hang him (Musharraf) for the unconstitutional steps of November 3, 2007 under which serving judges of the superior judiciary were ousted from their offices," the counsel pleaded. A four-member bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, Justice Tariq Pervez and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain was hearing contempt of court cases against PCO judges who violated a seven-member bench's decision on November 3, 2007 when the then president Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency in the country.
Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui said that they themselves held former president responsible for subversion of the constitution, committing the offence of high treason. When the bench asked the counsel regarding punishment for the offence, he said: "The capital punishment is given to a person who commits high treason under Article 6 of the Constitution ie hang Musharraf to death."
He said the impression of PCO judges, who took oath annulled Provisional Constitutional Order 2007, should be diluted. In his arguments, he contended that a set of judges took oath just to save judiciary and they should not be dubbed as Musharraf's supporters. The counsel said the court had complete authority to issue notices to all those persons who helped in carrying out unconstitutional steps to the then president and violated a seven-bench restraining order.
"Issue notices to all the responsible persons. Without their active support, a usurper could not survive even for a single day. Abettor should be served upon with a notice. Let us unmask the dirty faces of lawbreakers in public," he underlined. Terming current contempt of court proceedings against PCO judges as based on distorted views incorporated in the July 31 verdict, he said the main accused was roaming scot-free and only judges who took oath under the sword were issued notices.
The counsel contended that unless all the responsible persons were served contempt notices, the current proceedings against the judges would be partial. The court was going after the judges, he argued, who took oaths on November 3, 2007 but ignored the one who administered oath to them.
He further said that contempt proceedings against judges, was demeaning the judiciary, as common man perceives it as 'tussle between judges over authority'. He said the dignity of the apex court is usurped with each passing day. "Such an impression will give ample opportunity to anti-judiciary elements who would say that their views have been validated with the court's verdict over the pending issues," he added.
While addressing the counsel, when Justice Jawwad S Khawaja said that he had a fertile imagination, he promptly responded, saying that the bench should realise the situation in which his clients were! Referring to July 31 decision, he said that the bench was conducting proceedings against a set of judges wrongly, which was the outcome of a mere resolution presented by a lawyer and incorporated in the decision.
"You are wasting time...who asked you to undertake such proceedings. This misleading practice should not be taken to the extent that the court's functioning was hampered. The bench should decide other cases with greater importance," the counsel added. He further contended that these dysfunctional judges should be first removed from their offices under Article 209 and then proceeded against in contempt of court case.
"Let us suppose you are holding a judge for contempt and sentence him for his misconduct but he will remain a judge even if hand-cuffed unless he is removed from his office through Article 209," he argued. Earlier, Raja Ibrahim Satti, counsel for former chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, concluded his arguments by saying that July 31 judgement was biased as the aggrieved judges adjudicated upon the issue of PCO. The hearing was adjourned till Friday (today).