The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), a constitutional body with the authority to address misconduct allegations against judges, convened to assess charges against a current Supreme Court judge, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi.
The council informed the complainants that, if the allegations prove substantial, a formal show-cause notice would be issued to Justice Naqvi, necessitating his response. The SJC, chaired by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, along with other esteemed members, including Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Ijazul Ahsan, is anticipated to announce its decision on the merit of the charges as early as Wednesday.
During the preceding day’s session, senior counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmad represented Justice Naqvi, who contested the October 28 show-cause notice, contending that the proceedings were coram non judice, implying that the court lacked the authority to hear and decide the case.
The SJC requested substantial evidence from the complainants to support the accusations of misconduct and justify the removal of the judge from the Supreme Court. Hassan Raza Pasha presented the case on behalf of the Pakistan Bar Council, while Lahore-based lawyer Mian Dawood reiterated various allegations against Justice Naqvi, including audio leaks suggesting a conversation between the judge and former Punjab chief minister Chaudhry Parvez Elahi.
The complainants accused the judge of openly aligning with the PTI and exerting influence to favor PTI-related cases. Allegations of accumulating properties beyond known income sources were made, prompting the request for a money trail. It was also claimed that the judge used his position to benefit his children studying abroad and received financial gains from Zahid Rafique, the owner of Future Holdings.
Further accusations involved the sale of a property in Gujranwala at a significant profit and the judge allegedly revising income statements multiple times in 2021, omitting certain properties in his tax returns.
In a separate development, Amna Malik, whose complaint against Justice Sardar Tariq Masood was rejected, conceded that her husband, Abdullah Malik, was associated with Advocate M. Azhar Siddique. Ms. Malik acknowledged satisfaction with Justice Masood’s response to her complaint but faced challenges in answering questions about the drafting of the complaint and the organization’s registration under which she operates. The SJC had rejected her complaint, citing its unreliability and Ms. Malik’s withholding of information.
