Sanctity of vote cannot be used to defend crime, says Pakistan’s top judge


Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Sanctity of vote cannot be used to defend crime, says Pakistan’s top judge

ISLAMABAD: Emphasising that sanctity of the vote cannot be used as a defence in a criminal case, Chief Justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar on Monday said that judges do not write judgements to settle scores or to please anyone.The statement ostensibly came in response to continued criticism of the SC’s landmark judgement on July 28, in which a five-judge larger bench had unanimously disqualified Nawaz Sharif as the prime minister due to his failure to disclose ‘unwithdrawn receivables, constituting assets’ in his nomination papers filed ahead of the 2013 general elections.“We serve the people of Pakistan and we serve the Constitution of Pakistan to the best of our understanding and ability. We do not write judgements to please, we do not write judgements to settle scores,


we render judgements in the fine scales of justice,” Justice Nisar said while addressing a ceremony at the SC organised to mark the start of the new judicial year.
Leaders of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), particularly Sharif’s daughter Maryam, have been quite critical of the apex court’s verdict against the former premier.On Sunday, Maryam said that the judges’ oaths should now include words denoting that their decisions are ‘merit based and judicious’. Terming her father’s disqualification “a joke”, she wondered if the judges announced the decision because of some grudge or under pressure.


Addressing the full court, Justice Nisar said that the constitution provided system of governance to be run by three organs of the state, including executive, legislature and judiciary.“The Constitution is supreme and each state organ has to perform its duties and functions in accordance with the constitutional scheme. The most vital aspect of a true democracy is the rule of law for which the independence of judiciary is a sine qua non,” he said.Calling for the protection of fundamental rights of the people,

the CJP said the independence of judiciary means that the judges must be independent from all kinds of influences from any side, be it executive or by any other person or authority in the echelons of power.
“Under the constitution, the judiciary is vested with the power to undertake judicial review whenever any authority or functionary of the state acts ultra vires the constitution or the law,” he said, adding an official action, which violates constitution or the law reflects arbitrariness, results in misgovernance, non-governance and consequently in injustice.

“The prevalence of injustice results in denial and infringement of rights of the citizens, which in turn leads to chaos and anarchy in the society,” he added.
The CJP said the court had initiated suo motu proceedings in matters of great public importance involving violation of fundamental rights.“Some 29,262 complaints were received in the Human Rights Cell established in the apex court under the public interest litigation jurisdiction for redressal of grievances. Of these, 29,657 complaints were disposed of leaving behind 9,701 complaints. This exercise, in some measure, brought relief to the aggrieved persons,” he said, adding that the superior court judges have mostly forsaken the bulk of their vacation time to deal with cases and workload.

“Despite this, there has been a continuous rise in the backlog of cases in the SC,” he added.
Giving details, he said on August 31, 2016, 30,871 cases were pending in the apex court.“From September 1, 2016 to August 31, 2017, the apex court decided 13,667 cases from a total of 19,488 fresh cases. This has left a net balance of 36,692 cases as on August 31, 2017,” he said, adding that though the rate of disposal of cases is significant, yet the number of pending cases presents a daunting figure.

The CJP thanked his fellow judges for their cooperation and commitment to the cause of justice and the efforts made by them for quick dispensation of justice.He also emphasised the importance of a strong relationship between the Bench and the Bar, saying that all stakeholders of the justice system are required to work together to solve the backlog of cases as well as other problems.Earlier, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Ashtar Ausaf Ali urged the superior judiciary to establish a mechanism of institutional dialogue for betterment of the justice delivery system.

“We must establish a mechanism of institutional dialogue to bring about the sort exchange of ideas that can transform our justice delivery system as we know it,” he said, adding, “At the risk of redundancy, I again say that a free exchange of ideas never compromises the independence of separation of state institutions rather it can only develop a greater understanding of themselves and each other.”

The AGP said that the Panamagate case judgement affected the trichotomy of powers in the country.



Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
I would say SC should not respond to GodFather rather they should give verdicts based upon Justice!!
Last edited:
Sponsored Link