ISLAMABAD:
The conviction of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz continues to embarrass former Chief Justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar with political controversies, continually dragging him into the political thicket.
Nisar, who continues to enjoy wider support within the judiciary, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Ahsan Bhoon, also supporting him in all kinds of circumstances.
However, amid the political storm and criticism, a senior PTI leader nonetheless said such controversies would only bring the establishment and civilian government even closer. Government officials have consistently argued that the political rival lashes out at the judiciary to substantiate its own narrative.
On the flip side, the controversy has also sparked tensions within the legal fraternity itself as lawyers urge Pakistan Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed to call a full court meeting to discuss the matter. .
CJP pre-2017
The best legal scholars believe that Judge Nisar left behind two conflicting legacies. On the one hand, he is remembered for his “unprecedented judicial activism” and awareness. He is portrayed as an arrogant and somewhat “unbalanced” judge who has worked hard for the application of fundamental rights.
Read also : IHC will not hesitate to act against ex-CJP Nisar
Meanwhile, on the other hand, another version of his legacy dates back to his tenure before the year 2017, when he strictly enforced laws, rules and regulations and delivered historic verdicts on points of law, which will be cited in law books.
A quick review of its mandate and decisions sheds light on the results of its judgments and how they have been interpreted by political contradictions.
Interestingly, the former CJP Nisar was not part of the bench that disqualified Nawaz Sharif as a lawmaker under Article 62 (1) (f) of the Constitution. Shortly after being sworn in as CJP, supporters of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) launched a campaign against Saqib Nisar, calling him a “PML-N judge” on the grounds that he preferred not to be part of the larger court hearing. Panamagate.
During the hearing of PML-N chief Hanif Abbasi’s petition calling for the disqualification of PTI chief Imran Khan and Jahangir Tareen, Nisar gave the advice of the two PTI leaders a hard time.
However, in December 2017, former CJP Nisar declared Imran Khan as “Sadiq and Ameen”. But Tareen was disqualified under section 62 (1) (f) of the constitution.
Meanwhile, the PMLN leadership criticized the judges for the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif.
In December 2017, former CJP Nisar responded to the PML-N’s attack on judges and urged them to have the judiciary like “baba” (grandfather). Therefore, they must respect it.
Later, Nisar visibly changed his approach in the last year of his tenure and began a unique judicial activism, completely different from what he has done as a superior court judge throughout his 20 years. careers.
It is also a fact that his judicial activism had eclipsed his previous pro-executive and pro-parliament approach which was also characterized by judicial restraint. Many lawyers describe his judicial activism as a “turn around” in his approach.
Prior to 2017, Justice Nisar believed in political-constitutional supremacy. But he later emerged as a proponent of judicial and constitutional supremacy.
Read also : If Nawaz can go to jail, why not Nisar: ex-PM Abbasi
He had been pro-executive throughout his career but during his senior year he became skeptical about the powers of the executive. He had been skeptical of public interest litigation under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, but became a strong supporter of the exercise of suo motu powers.
As a judge, he had not believed in the theory of the basic structure of the Constitution and had always believed in the supremacy of parliament. But later he started to say that the Constitution is supreme, which must be interpreted by the supreme court.
Until 2017, Judge Nisar was considered a pro-Pakistani judge from the Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) who preferred not to lead a larger bench that heard the Panamagate case. But that image underwent a drastic change when he was openly criticized as a judge who harbored a bias against PML-N.
Until 2017, Judge Nisar was known as a judge who provided an opportunity to hear from lawyers, but in his final year many senior lawyers avoided appearing before him due to his allegedly rude conduct. Harsh words have also been exchanged between Judge Nisar and leading lawyers during this year.
He was visibly tough on politicians, media men and senior officials. However, no visible change was seen in his approach to the military establishment, which is why one section accused him of weakening civilian supremacy. However, another section believed he had exposed the corruption of the political elite.
It was perhaps the first time in Pakistan’s judicial history that a CJP also heard cases on weekends. Water, health, education and population control were its main priorities. Likewise, the CJP has conducted one-off proceedings in matters of public interest at the Lahore Registry.
Judge Nisar not only ruled on matters related to the public interest, but also visited different hospitals, prisons, etc. He also launched a campaign to raise funds for the construction of dams. Despite reservations, people appreciate him for highlighting the problem of water scarcity in the country.
Last year, Courtroom No.1 always remained crowded during high-profile case hearings, in which several politicians, officials and ordinary people appeared.
Read also : IHC Acknowledges Charges Against Former CJP Saqib Nisar
Judge Nisar’s rise to CS has been dramatic. The government led by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had appointed him chief justice of the LHC and had elevated Khawaja Sharif to the supreme court without the consent of former CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry.
However, Judge Nisar refused to become the Chief Justice of the LHC. Subsequently, the PPP government withdrew its decision and directly elevated it to the rank of SC with the consent of the CJP.
During the time of Judge Iftikhar (2009-13), when the judiciary assumed the powers of all other institutions, Judge Nisar raised a dissenting voice.
Unlike other judges, Justice Nisar wanted to set parameters for public interest litigation under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, but unfortunately he also exceeded the jurisdiction of the CJP.
Several questions were raised about the composition of the benches in high-profile cases during his tenure.
It was alleged that Nisar always preferred to include “like-minded judges” in the benches hearing sensitive cases.
Some judges have openly opposed the exercise of its public interest jurisdiction.
Last year, Courtroom No.1 always remained crowded during high-profile case hearings, in which several politicians, officials and ordinary people appeared.
On February 18, 2010, he was elevated to the Supreme Court and was sworn in as a CJP on December 3, 2016. His career as a judge of the SC can be divided into different phases.
Judge Nisar’s rise to CS has been dramatic. The government led by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had appointed him chief justice of the LHC and had elevated Khawaja Sharif to the supreme court without the consent of former CJP Iftikhar Chaudhry.
Read also : Ex-CJ calls audio clip in favor of Sharif “fabricated”
However, Judge Nisar refused to become the Chief Justice of the LHC. Subsequently, the PPP government withdrew its decision and directly elevated it to the rank of SC with the consent of the CJP.
When a court of 17 judges considered the 18th Amendment case in 2010/11, only Judge Nisar and Judge Asif Saeed Khosa openly approved the constitutional amendment regarding changing the procedure for appointing judges.
Due to their opposition, Justice Chaudhry sent the case back to parliament with few recommendations to change the judicial appointment process. Likewise, despite opposition from the then CJP, Judge Nisar had also written dissenting notes in judges’ pension cases.
In the 21st Constitutional Amendment case, Justice Nisar wrote that the doctrine of “fundamental characteristics” should not be adopted and incorporated into Pakistan’s constitutional law. He said the ultimate power should not come from the feathers of the appointed judges, but from the elected representatives of the Pakistani people.
“A strong judiciary is not necessarily an independent judiciary. And conversely, an independent justice is not necessarily a powerful justice ”, he noted.
However, his approach visibly changed last year, when he did not approve the law of parliament, which allowed Nawaz Sharif to lead his party after his disqualification. He led the largest bench that supported the lifetime disqualification of lawmakers under section 62 (1) (f).
Later, the suo motu was taken over the victory of the senators, who held dual nationality. The case remained in abeyance for several months. In October 2018, when the PTI won a majority in Punjab, the Supreme Court disqualified two PML-N senators, Haroon Akhtar and Sadia Abbasi, for having dual nationality.
Read also : Fawad warns PML-N against “targeting” of justice and army
After their disqualification, the PTI managed to secure both seats. Unlike the 2017 electoral law, the Supreme Court on June 5, 2018 restored almost all of the information omitted from the nomination forms approved by parliament.
Justice Nisar also gave politicians a hard time. All the chief ministers and some ministers were summoned by him. Unlike his predecessors, Judge Nisar did not hesitate to summon political leaders on issues relating to bad governance.
Several lawmakers and media figures such as Punjab Chief Minister Usman Buzdar, Senator Azam Swati, Amir Liaqat, Dr Shahid Masood, Arshad Sharif and Mir Shakil Rehman have thrown themselves at the mercy of the tribunal by offering unconditional apologies in different business.
Justice Nisar has remained almost consistent in his approach to the military establishment during his tenure as Supreme Judge. Although he focused on the application of fundamental rights last year, he was unable to solve the problem of missing persons.
The 2010 SC verdict in the Macro Habib case could not be implemented. The Asghar Khan case is still pending. His opponents have always propagated that he has some understanding with the military establishment. However, he asked Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to clear a road in Abpara Islamabad.
