A nine member bench of Supreme court today's order on Constitution Petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution regarding alleged Memorandum to Admiral Mike Mullen by Mr. Hussain Haqqani, former Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States of America
O R D E R
This order was written by IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ. – Barrister Zafarullah Khan and Mr. Tariq Asad, ASCs/petitioners in person have addressed arguments on the maintainability of the petitions in view of the observations made by this Court in its order dated 01.12.2011. Mr. Rashid A. Rizvi, Sr. ASC has started arguments in Constitution Petition No. 79 of 2011, but we have to adjourn the case because of the important personal commitment of Ms. Asma Jahangir, learned ASC appearing on behalf of former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani on account of the post-marriage ceremonies of her daughter.
2. It has been noted during hearing that despite the passing of order dated 15.12.2011 in Chambers, replies/rejoinders have not been filed by the respondents, which were deemed necessary for just decision of the case. Whereas this Court in Constitution Petition No. 42 of 2011 has held that in order to ascertain as to whether a question of public importance is involved to exercise jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the facts of the case are required to be examined. Therefore the petitioners as well as the respondents are directed to file affidavits under Order VIII rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, subject to all just exceptions, to clear the cobwebs in the different stands taken by them. The Federation of Pakistan shall swear affidavits, denying or accepting item-wise/parawise the stand taken by the Chief of Army Staff, DG, ISI, former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani as well as Mansoor Ijaz. Both the latter mentioned persons shall also swear affidavits, denying or accepting parawise stand taken by the Federation, Chief of Army Staff, DG, ISI, so on and so forth. All such affidavits shall be filed and exchanged by the parties before the next date of hearing.
3. It has been painfully noted that after passing of order dated 01.12.2011, some of the persons, including Mr. Babar Awan, ASC and other persons belonging to the Government functionaries convened a press conference probably in the office of the Secretary Information or in the Press Information Department wherein the proceedings of this Court were ridiculed, insulted by using contemptuous language, so much so, by involving or using the name of one of the Judges who was not a member of the Bench. We have inquired from the learned Attorney General for Pakistan as to whether it is the stand of the Government to ridicule the judiciary, which is one of the most important pillars of the State, he abruptly stated that it could not be the stand of the Federation, however, time was given to him to take instruction and file statement in writing. In the second half of the proceedings, he pointed out that as the Prime Minister/Chief Executive is not available to him, therefore, he would submit statement after seeking instructions in that behalf. We have asked him that if the stand of the Prime Minister is the same as he is expressing on behalf of the Federation, then the Prime Minister/Chief Executive be asked to inform us that what action he has taken against the persons who, using official premises, ridiculed, insulted and criticized the judiciary in spite of the fact that the matter is still sub judice. Similarly, we have noted with concern that the Federal Law Minister of the Government of Pakistan, being a law knowing person, criticized the proceedings by uttering the words, which ought not to have been used by him.
4. The learned Attorney General has been further asked to place on record copies of the notification in pursuance of which Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal, now retired, was appointed as Chairman of the Commission to inquire into the incident of 2nd May, 2011 without consulting the Chief Justice of Pakistan, resignation tendered by former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani and notification of acceptance of the same. He agreed to do the needful during course of the day.
This order was written by IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ. – BarristerZafarullah Khan and Mr. Tariq Asad, ASCs/petitioners in person have addressed arguments on the maintainability of the petitions in view of the observations made by this Court in its order dated 01.12.2011. Mr. Rashid A. Rizvi, Sr. ASC has started arguments in Constitution Petition No. 79 of 2011, but we have to adjourn the case because of the important personal commitment of Ms. Asma Jahangir, learned ASC appearing on behalf of former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani on account of the post-marriage ceremonies of her daughter.
2. It has been noted during hearing that despite the passing of order dated 15.12.2011 in Chambers, replies/rejoinders have not been filed by the respondents, which were deemed necessary for just decision of the case. Whereas this Court in Constitution Petition No. 42 of 2011 has held that in order to ascertain as to whether a question of public importance is involved to exercise jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the facts of the case are required to be examined. Therefore the petitioners as well as the respondents are directed to file affidavits under Order VIII rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, subject to all just exceptions, to clear the cobwebs in the different stands taken by them. The Federation of Pakistan shall swear affidavits, denying or accepting item-wise/parawise the stand taken by the Chief of Army Staff, DG, ISI, former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani as well as Mansoor Ijaz. Both the latter mentioned persons shall also swear affidavits, denying or accepting parawise stand taken by the Federation, Chief of Army Staff, DG, ISI, so on and so forth. All such affidavits shall be filed and exchanged by the parties before the next date of hearing.
3. It has been painfully noted that after passing of order dated 01.12.2011, some of the persons, including Mr. Babar Awan, ASC and other persons belonging to the Government functionaries convened a press conference probably in the office of the Secretary Information or in the Press Information Department wherein the proceedings of this Court were ridiculed, insulted by using contemptuous language, so much so, by involving or using the name of one of the Judges who was not a member of the Bench. We have inquired from the learned Attorney General for Pakistan as to whether it is the stand of the Government to ridicule the judiciary, which is one of the most important pillars of the State, he abruptly stated that it could not be the stand of the Federation, however, time was given to him to take instruction and file statement in writing. In the second half of the proceedings, he pointed out that as the Prime Minister/Chief Executive is not available to him, therefore, he would submit statement after seeking instructions in that behalf. We have asked him that if the stand of the Prime Minister is the same as he is expressing on behalf of the Federation, then the Prime Minister/Chief Executive be asked to inform us that what action he has taken against the persons who, using official premises, ridiculed, insulted and criticized the judiciary in spite of the fact that the matter is still sub judice. Similarly, we have noted with concern that the Federal Law Minister of the Government of Pakistan, being a law knowing person, criticized the proceedings by uttering the words, which ought not to have been used by him.
4. The learned Attorney General has been further asked to place on record copies of the notification in pursuance of which Mr. Justice Javed Iqbal, now retired, was appointed as Chairman of the Commission to inquire into the incident of 2nd May, 2011 without consulting the Chief Justice of Pakistan, resignation tendered by former Ambassador Hussain Haqqani and notification of acceptance of the same. He agreed to do the needful during course of the day.
