islamabad
The federal government has claimed that Supreme Court judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa is biased towards government functionaries.
Justice Isa is currently facing a presidential reference for not disclosing his family member’s assets.
According to a report in Express Tribune, a statement filed by the government through the office of the attorney general of Pakistan stated, “After making allegations against the president, the prime minister, the federation, the law minister and the attorney general for Pakistan (AGP), there is apparent bias in the mind of the learned petitioner judge (Justice Isa).”
Moreover, the government has denied Justice Isa’s allegation that his family were under surveillance. It has further stated that to make allegations about the government maligning a judge and violating their family’s privacy may call for disciplinary proceedings.
The government has claimed that Justice Isa’s son and daughter were 23 and 26 years old respectively at the time of the purchase and because they had no source of income, it was Justice Isa’s obligation to disclose the source of funds.
In its statement, the government denied that any attempt to subvert the constitution had been made and that the executive had not attacked the judiciary.
The federal government has claimed that Supreme Court judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa is biased towards government functionaries.
Justice Isa is currently facing a presidential reference for not disclosing his family member’s assets.
According to a report in Express Tribune, a statement filed by the government through the office of the attorney general of Pakistan stated, “After making allegations against the president, the prime minister, the federation, the law minister and the attorney general for Pakistan (AGP), there is apparent bias in the mind of the learned petitioner judge (Justice Isa).”
Furthermore, the government has questioned whether Justice Isa should continue to be a part of the judiciary where the federation is a party in the proceedings in most cases. The government, in its statement, further made it clear that judges were liable to accountability.
Moreover, the government has denied Justice Isa’s allegation that his family were under surveillance. It has further stated that to make allegations about the government maligning a judge and violating their family’s privacy may call for disciplinary proceedings.
The government has further made the allegation that the judge is trying to avoid providing the money trail regarding the purchase of foreign properties.
The government has claimed that Justice Isa’s son and daughter were 23 and 26 years old respectively at the time of the purchase and because they had no source of income, it was Justice Isa’s obligation to disclose the source of funds.
In its statement, the government denied that any attempt to subvert the constitution had been made and that the executive had not attacked the judiciary.