The petitioners stated that substantial details regarding the references against Justice Qazi Faez were quickly available to the media which is unprecedented as the public at large have no information about the other more than 400 references/complaints pending before the SJC over the years.
They said that before the SJC issued notice to the concerned judges, some members of the government publicly spoke about the contents of the presidential reference against Justice Qazi, and to the contents of documents purportedly forming part of the reference and made contemptuous remarks about him.
They contended that under the Constitution, a matter may only be sent to the SJC by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister. Presumably, the presidential reference against Justice Qazi has also been filed on the PM's advice, but it has not been shared with the public.
The petitioners said as the SJC was set to take up the presidential reference against Justice Qazi, the Law Ministry allegedly decided to release over Rs 175 million (of taxpayers money) to 133 bar associations across the country in order to get their support. The co-relation between the timing of the funding and the presidential references is obvious.
They submitted that the manner in which the Respondent No 2 (secretary SJC) pushed post-haste the reference out of turn against the judges of superior courts is glaring. They prayed that in view of the conduct of respondent No 2, the Supreme Court should declare that the SJC proceedings pertaining to the references are void and liable to be quashed.
The petitioners stated that according to Supreme Court's press release dated 15-06-2019, 426 complaints/references had been instituted before the SJC, of which 398 had been disposed of, and 28 matters, including two presidential references, are pending. The urgency in taking up references against a sitting judge and also Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, then judge of Islamabad High Court, seemed to be that both have been critical of the intelligence agencies of the country, they added.
They urged to declare that the procedure is arbitrary, ultra vires and bad in law, inter alia, is not providing a criterion for the order of taking up matters and the honourable SJC cannot function unless proper procedure is in place.
It should be declared that in material parts, the code of conduct is too vague a document to be made a yardstick for proceeding against a judge of a superior court and a direction for framing a proper code should kindly be issued.
It should be declared that the SJC may not take up a matter out of turn unless cogent reasons are supplied or reasonable criteria regarding the order of taking up of matters are provided in the procedure.
The respondent No 2 should be directed to furnish the information requested by the petitioner No 1 vide letter dated 16th July 2019.
It should be directed that the matters against Justice Qazi and Justice Agha be taken up on their turn, after disposing of the matters already pending and in accordance with properly framed rules/procedure that comply with the law and the Constitution and the general norms of justice.
It should be declared that the SJC is bound to dispose of every reference filed before it and that unless a reference is dismissed, a judge is not entitled to receive post-retirement benefits irrespective of whether he/she retires or resigns during the pendency of references before the SJC.
It should be directed that references that may have been considered "infructuous" and already disposed of because a judge has resigned or retired, are to be taken up and decided.
The petitioners have made SJC, its secretary, federation through Ministry of Law and Justice, President Dr Arif Alvi through his principal secretary, Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha through SC and SHC registrars as respondents.