ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) on Friday filed a misconduct complaint against Supreme Court judge Justice Syed Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi in the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), seeking to initiate an inquiry against him and He was requested to be removed as a judge. Judge of the Supreme Court.
The complaint was jointly filed by Pakistan Bar Council Chairman Haroon Rasheed and Council Executive Committee Chairman Hasan Raza Pasha under Section 5(1) of the Supreme Judicial Council Procedure of Inquiry 2005, read with Article 209 of the Constitution.
He said that the purpose of accountability of the judges of the high courts has been left to the judges of the Supreme Court under Article 209(8) of the Constitution.
Last month, PBC had announced that it would file a malpractice complaint with the SJC after an audio leak surfaced, purportedly showing former Punjab Chief Minister Pervez Elahi talking to a special bench or judge. There was a discussion about settling the case in front.
PBC had said that the Punjab Bar Council, Peshawar Bar Council, Balochistan Bar Council, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council and Islamabad Bar Council would separately file a complaint of misconduct against the judge in the SJC.
Despite the fact that the Supreme Judiciary is already under fire, the audio leaks attributed to the Supreme Court judge may not have troubled the judge’s conscience, but the Pakistan Bar Council has taken up the matter with great concern and the court’s respect. and higher judiciary for the sake of dignity,” the complaint said.
The PBC submitted that the attribution of such audio leaks to the said judge required an inquiry by the SJC. It also said that information regarding the accumulation of assets worth crores of rupees by the respondent judge was also circulating in the media, which further necessitated the initiation of appropriate action against the judge.
It held that the judges of the Supreme Court, while constituting the SJC, laid down a code of conduct for the judges of the superior courts in exercise of their powers under Article 209 (8) of the Constitution of Pakistan. Thus respect and compliance with this code becomes the prime duty of Supreme Court judges.
PBC submitted that former Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Pervez Elahi was “clearly seen in the viral audio instructing an expert lawyer to decide an important case before the respondent judge”, which “created a public impression”. created and mobilized.largely against the independence, sanctity and dignity of the High Judiciary, warranting an inquiry into the matter.
“It is learned that the respondent judge has tried to regularize and legitimize his income by selling the property in the year 2021, namely House No. 375, Phase II, DHA, Gujranwala Cantt., for a consideration of Rs.60 million. for,” said the PBC.
He added that the said property was purchased by him for Rs 4.7 million, adding that the respondent judge tried to revise the 2021 tax returns several times in an attempt to justify his income.
PBC’s complaint stated that two sons of the respondent judge have a law office in the EVQ Trust Property Board, Lahore, adding that the decision to litigate its rent was initially decided by the ETPB. Chairman had done against the said sons.
“However, the respondent judge later managed to get the Federal Secretary for Religious Affairs to bend the decision in favor of his sons,” the PBC reported, adding that allegedly, the respondent judge ordered his two Promoted the legal practice of sons viz., Ayad Ali Murtaza Naqvi and Syed Ali Murtaza Naqvi, Advocates, practicing law at the Bar for about five years.
“The general perception in the legal community is that the respondent judges are exercising their official influence in patronizing the legal practice of their sons, which is a serious violation of the Code of Conduct,” the PBC added.
It further stated that the respondent judge by his misconduct violated the code of conduct framed by the Supreme Judicial Council and thereby contributed to the disobedience of the Constitution.
“The information presented requires a thorough inquiry by the SJC, while the respondent judge has been attached to the proceedings to give final findings in this regard,” the PBC submitted. .
