ISLAMABAD: Former Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Justice Rana Shamim told the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday that the affidavit he recorded before a UK magistrate was a sealed document that was not meant to be viewed by the general public.
Shamim’s comments came during a hearing in a case involving a leaked audiotape allegedly involving former Pakistan Chief Justice Saqib Nisar. Shamim had alleged in a notarized affidavit a few weeks earlier that the then CJP had directed a high court judge not to release Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz on bail at any cost before the 2018 general elections. Following the publication of the allegations in The News, the IHC directed the ex-judge to submit his response.
The former GB chief Justice Rana Shamim told the court that he had no idea which affidavit had been reported in the media.
During today’s hearing, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah, who was presiding over the proceedings, stated that the judiciary’s freedom was dependent on press freedom. “However, there are some responsibilities that come with press freedom,” he added.
The chief justice of the IHC then summoned Shamim to the rostrum and asked if he had submitted a written response to the court regarding the case.
“My lawyer will explain why I did not submit a written response,” Shamim replied. “My brother’s chellum is coming up in a few days. Please hold a hearing following that “He asked for it.
Shamim was informed by Justice Minallah that he had submitted an affidavit regarding an incident that allegedly occurred three years ago. “The details of the affidavit were published in a newspaper for the public to read,” noted the IHC CJ.
“After my affidavit was published, I was contacted. I verified it “The former judge responded. “The affidavit was sealed; I’m not sure how it got leaked,” he continued.
“Did you not give the affidavit to him [the reporter]?” Justice Minallah inquired.
“No, I did not submit the affidavit for publication,” the ex-judge replied.
‘You tried to shake the public’s confidence in the judiciary’
Shamim was asked by Justice Minallah why he had submitted the affidavit in London. “The court has given you five days to respond in writing. You must explain why you submitted an affidavit after a three-year hiatus “Justice Minallah stated.
Shamim was told by the IHC chief justice that he “tried to shake the public’s confidence in the judiciary,” and that he was free to say whatever he wanted in the written response.
“My brother and sisters-in-law chehlum will be held on December 5 and 12, respectively,” Shamim informed the chief justice of the IHC. “Please hold the hearing after that,” he asked again.
He stated that if the hearing is held sooner, he will be unable to obtain the original affidavit.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s Attorney-General Khalid Jawed Khan stated that the court can order Shamim to obtain the affidavit through the embassy.
The attorney general asked the court to postpone action against the media, claiming that its role, in this case, was secondary. He urged the court to order Shamim to appear in court with his written response and the original affidavit.
Shamim responded that he has no idea which affidavit was reported in the media. “Let me first look over the affidavit that was published,” he said.
In response, the attorney-general stated, “The person who submitted the affidavit is unaware of its contents.”
“If he doesn’t know, who wrote the affidavit?”
“It should be noted that he [Rana Shamim] does not know what is written in the affidavit,” the attorney general said. “The affidavit was submitted on November 10, and he claims today that he has no idea what is written in it.”
“I do not believe in contempt of court,” Justice Minallah stated emphatically. “Judges should be held accountable. Please, however, refrain from slandering this high court for the sake of political narratives “He continued.
The IHC chief justice adjourned the case until December 7, ordering Shamim to submit a written response along with the original affidavit at the next hearing.
Justice Minallah also requested that the former judge submit a written response to the high court’s show-cause notice.
