Dorab Patel on Judicial Aloofness – CJP’s meeting Richard Holbrooke
Mr Shakil Jafri editor of The Financial Daily asked me to reproduce as an article what I had written on CJ meeting Richard Holbrooke. With the intention to expand on these few paragraphs I chanced upon some reflections of a past judge which I added to my statement and am reproducing it below.
Members of the Judiciary are supposed to stay aloof from social and political contacts. In this context let me quote from a speech delivered by Justice Dorab Patel at the Cornelius Society in Lahore in 1995. Justice Patel was a dissenting judge in the Bhutto case and had refused to take oath on General Zia’s PCO. He states that the judiciary in Pakistan inherited from the long line of judges, British and Indian, traditions of service, of learning and scholarship, of integrity, financial and intellectual, and of social aloofness.
He cites an interesting story of the Supreme Court of Bombay. In some civil litigation, the bailiff of the Supreme Court went to the Governor’s House to serve a summons of the Court on a member of the Governor’s staff. He was threatened and ordered to leave. The same happened when the Chief Justice sent a very senior police officer along with the bailiff. The Chief Justice instead of meeting the Governor, which the latter wanted, locked the Supreme Court and returned to England where he lodged a complaint and resigned from office. His resignation was not in vain as never again did the Bombay Government treat any Judge in a casual manner. But the most valuable legacy of this clash with the Governor was that the Judges of Bombay continued the tradition of rigid aloofness of the Judiciary from the Executive. A judiciary cannot remain independent without this tradition.
Justice Dorab Patel continues to narrate, that when he became a Judge of the West Pakistan High Court, the Chief Justice of West Pakistan, Justice Wahiduddin Ahmed (father of Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed) told him that he had to change his life and habits because he had become a Judge and it was his duty to lead a secluded life and to avoid meeting Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers and politicians which according to Justice Patel he tried his best to do.
I therefore insist that our Judiciary should reflect such long and cherished traditions without which it simply cannot remain independent.
This post was submitted by Dr Arif Alvi.
Comment Meta: Leave a comment | Subscribe to the Comment Feed | Upload your Comment Image
fully agreed !!
Exactly, its no business of judiciary to meet with officials and politicos. CJP even shouldn’t be meeting with Obama, when it comes to that.
Awab,
Sorry for the digression, but why have you stopped the comments from your blog on Zaid Hamid Kizzab?
I have not seen you doing that in any other case, for example Ghazi brothers?
Did they pressurize you? not by force but by emotions?
I look forward to your response.
[...] on the June 11, 2009 he has penned “Dorab Patel on Judicial Aloofness – CJP’s meeting Richard Holbrooke” in this piece he has cited the attitude of past judged like Dorab Patel and Justice Wahiduddin Ahmed [...]
Judiciary is a farce to legitimize an illegitimates I mean Politicians. Now as you can see there are several cases on Zardari yet he’s ruling on our heads as a president.
What a sick joke of 20th century that hez ruling as a president on our heads why? becuz judiciary legitimize him 2nd his wife murder and soon after democracy paved the way for his selection. Public.pk might not want to see him as a PS. Judiciary is handicapped by super-rich.
Modern history is the account of how the Plutocrats(Bankers) converts its monopoly of credit into a monopoly of power. This entails destroying our connection with nation, religion (God), race and family. It means substituting objective truth (God, His rules) with their diktat(political correctness) Parliamentary system is another farce.
It takes courage and clarity to understand we are mice in their lab experiment. We have been sold out by our “leaders”, dumbed down by our media and education and spoiled stupid by the warfare state. (Everyone can be bought.) We can’t even recognize what is happening in Judiciary and in the meeting of hellbrooke and CJP.
All I can presume that Hellbrooke instantly went to see CJP to remind him
1. not to reopen cases of AZ
2. no more missing persons
3. nothing for swat war
This is all theater put on for yokels. we all need 180 degree turn b4 burn in hell-brooke.
Updated with sum minor updates [Encore]
Judiciary is a farce which legitimize an illegitimates I mean Politicians. Now as you can see there are several cases on Zardari yet he’s ruling on our heads as a president.
What a sick joke of 20th century that heZ ruling as a president on our heads. Y? becuz Judiciary legitimize him(NRO)2nd his wife murder and soon after democracy paved the way for his selection. Public.pk might not wanted to see him as a PS. Judiciary is handicapped by super-rich.
Modern history is the account of how the Plutocrats(Bankers) converts its monopoly of credit into a monopoly of power. This entails destroying our connection with nation, religion (God), race and family. It means substituting objective truth (God, His rules) with their diktat(political correctness) Parliamentary system is another farce.
It takes courage and clarity to understand we are mice (or terrorists) in their lab experiment. We have been sold out by our “leaders”, dumbed down by our media and education and spoiled stupid by the warfare state. (Everyone can be bought even Ifti Ch.) We can’t even recognize what is happening in Judiciary and in the meeting of hellbrooke with CJP.
All I can presume that Hellbrooke instantly went to see CJP to remind him
1. not to reopen cases of AZ
2. no more missing persons
3. nothing for swat war
This is all theater put on for yokels. we all need 180 degree turn b4 burn in hell-brooke let alone act.
Judiciary is most for sure a farce look at http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Islamabad/12-Jun-2009/Petition-to-make-presidential-pardon-part-of-record-dismissed-by-SC to show that supreme court is biased?