AGL37.99▼ -0.03 (0.00%)AIRLINK215.53▲ 18.17 (0.09%)BOP9.8▲ 0.26 (0.03%)CNERGY6.79▲ 0.88 (0.15%)DCL9.17▲ 0.35 (0.04%)DFML38.96▲ 3.22 (0.09%)DGKC100.25▲ 3.39 (0.04%)FCCL36.7▲ 1.45 (0.04%)FFL14.49▲ 1.32 (0.10%)HUBC134.13▲ 6.58 (0.05%)HUMNL13.63▲ 0.13 (0.01%)KEL5.69▲ 0.37 (0.07%)KOSM7.32▲ 0.32 (0.05%)MLCF45.87▲ 1.17 (0.03%)NBP61.28▼ -0.14 (0.00%)OGDC232.59▲ 17.92 (0.08%)PAEL40.73▲ 1.94 (0.05%)PIBTL8.58▲ 0.33 (0.04%)PPL203.34▲ 10.26 (0.05%)PRL40.81▲ 2.15 (0.06%)PTC28.31▲ 2.51 (0.10%)SEARL108.51▲ 4.91 (0.05%)TELE8.74▲ 0.44 (0.05%)TOMCL35.83▲ 0.83 (0.02%)TPLP13.84▲ 0.54 (0.04%)TREET24.38▲ 2.22 (0.10%)TRG61.15▲ 5.56 (0.10%)UNITY34.84▲ 1.87 (0.06%)WTL1.72▲ 0.12 (0.08%)

Justice Afridi recuses himself from case on IHC judges’ letter

Share
Tweet
WhatsApp
Share on Linkedin
[tta_listen_btn]

Justice Yahya Afridi has recused himself from the suo motu case, taken up by the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, pertaining to a letter by Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges over alleged interference in judicial matters by intelligence agencies.

In his note, the SC judge stated that the matters raised in the IHC judges’ letter should be viewed in accordance with the Supreme Judicial Council’s code of conduct.

Justice Afridi, who was part of the seven-member bench hearing the case, said: “High Courts are independent courts under the Constitution. Article 184/3 should not be invoked on independence of high courts.”

The seven-member bench conducting the hearing of suo motu case is headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprised six other judges — Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.

During the first hearing of the matter on April 3, the country’s top judge said the SC will not tolerate any interference in judicial affairs and is taking the letter by Islamabad High Court judges “very seriously”.

Justice Yahya, in his note, maintained that the suo motu notice was taken by the apex court in “good faith”, however, it may harm the independence of high courts and their chief justices.

 

Related Posts

Get Alerts