HAMID KHAN AHMAD AWAIS
SENIOR ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN ADVOCATE, SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
CORNELIUS, LANE & MUFT!
Nawa-s-Waat House.
AWAIS LAW ASSOCIATES
‘Awais Chambers. 1-Mozang Road
4, Shahrah-e-Fatima Jinnah, Lahore. Lahore
Yel: Off, 6306301, 6360868, 6360824 Tel, 92-42-3735 1857, 37227814
Fax; 92-42-6303301, 6302965 Fax: 92-42-37121973
E-mail: clm@brain.net.pk E-mail: awaislawassociates@hotmail.com
August 02, 2014
Justice (Retd.) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry,
Vormer Chief Justice of Pakistan
House No.222. Street 50
104. Isha
nabad
Subject: Notice u/s 8 of the Defamation Ordinance, 2002,
Dear Sir.
We act for Mr. Imran Khan. Chairman, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insat (PTT) who
received a copy of your I egal Notice on July 25. 2014. He has instructed us to
make a respectful reply to your notice under the Defamation Ordinance 2002
Since your goodself has chosen to address our Client directly and not through
counsel, therefore. we are constrained to address our reply directly to you
In the first place, we would like to acknowledge your invaluable contribution
to the cause of rule of law. supremacy of the Constitution and independence of
judiciary. The entire nation has appreciated your courage and fortitude for
standing up to a military dictator who wanted to subjugate the judiciary to his
own will and whims. The entire nation was behind you on 9 March 2007 and
again on 3 November. 2007 when you decided ty resist unconstitutional and
illegal demands of a usurper. The entire lawyers fraternity. e1vil society and
several political parties including Pakistan Tehreck-e-Insat (PT) stood solidly
behind you in the demand for restoration of judiciary. Our client as the leader
of PT suffered detention in jail during the course of the movement
We appreciate the judgment in Siru/ [igh Court Bar Association v. Federation
of Pakistan (PLD. 2009 $.C.879) which you authored. This landmark
judgment may prove to be bulwark against any future attempt on the part of
any military or civilian adventurer to impose unconstitutional rule on the
country. We appreciate judicial activism under your leadership which
provided expeditious reliel and remedy to the downtrodden segments of our
Society, Our client particularly appreciates your rulings in the cases Tiled by
him for exclusion of more than 37 million bogus / unverified voters and for
conferring voting right on expatriate Pakistanis
tVI
As explained above, our client had participated in the movement for
restoration of judiciary and suffered incarceration. He therefore had high
expectations from the judiciary under your leadership. He and his party felt
secured that under your guardianship of judiciary. no injustice would be done
to his party by Election Commission of Pakistan (FCP) and the election
machinery thereunder. [1 was expected that judiciary would be vigila
prevent any injustice. It came as a shock to our client when. afier the general
elections. he and his party were meted out step motherly treatment at the
hands of the judiciary. The party was pushed into the failed hands of
adequate and insecure election tribunals knowing well that the party
candidates would suffer in limbo for a long time while those who committed
electoral fraud would cnjoy their offices obtained through false mandate The
judiciary. after its restoration in March 2009. was never perceived as a
conventional institution heaped in delays but a vibrant and innovative one
with immediate response to and redressal of injustices at the highest level
under your dynamic leadership. This unfortunately did not happen. You can
therefore appreciate the frustration on the part of our client and his party
candidates. Being so sensitive and perceptive. you can certainly understand
ny and disillusionment that our client and his party members had to yo
There is another deep disappointment which we think may not be lefi unsaid
PTI had filed an application on 6 June 2015 in the pending proceedings for
implementation of the judgment in workers Party Pakistan Federation of
Pakistan (reported as PLD 2012 SC 681) which was rendered to make the
elections free. fair and transparent. However completely unwarranted
objections were made by the office. Such objections on a miscellaneous
application filed in pending proceedings are totally unprecedented. n office
appeal was filed against such objections which was not
months: What can our client infer from such unsympathetic res
apex court and its office?
We respectllly answer the numbered paragraphs of your notice as under
We whole heartedly acknowledge and defer to the contents of these paras.
You deserve every assard. distinction and medal conferred upon you. Indeed
the entire nation is proud of your accomplishments
We believe that the appointment of judicial officers as DROs and ROs was a
step in the right direction, However, their subsequent conduct during the
course of the general elections is shocking to the entire nation. They became
party to unprecedented rigging and clectoral fraud particularly in the
Provinces of Sindh and the Punjab which is mind boggling and beyond
comprehension. Our client and his Party (P11) are trying to unravel and unfold
the drama of how the election was stolen in and around 11 May 2013. This is
being done in the higher national interest and to make the conduct of elections
free. fair and transparent in the luture.
ay98 10.
nN
It is a matter of common knowledge that extensive electoral fraud was
committed during the course of general elections of 11 May 2013 (pre poll.
during the poll and post poll). Ihe rigging is unprecedented even in the
contest of our chequered history of untuir elections that were held earlier. We
believe that at least 35 to 40 National Assembly and twice as many Provincial
Assembly seats were stolen from Pl and the judiciary did nothing to redress
such gross injustice
It is very respectfully. stated that our client did not resort to any_malicious.
scandalous and disparaging languaze against the judiciary The ROS ond
DROs were performing administrative functions during the elections and
could not be treated as judicial offivers. Therefore. there was no duty cast
upon your goodsel! 10 protect or defend their role which tumed out to be
notorious, With due respect we point out that National Judicial Policy Making
Committee (NJPMC) had no business to assess the performance of ROs and
DROs or to give them a clean chit while the petitions concerning their conduct
were pending before the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and were
likely to be taken up by the Election Tribunals. You would kindly agree that
any finding in their favour would constitute prejudgment on the part of
NJPMC and would prejudice the cases of the agurieved candidates before the
ECP and Election Tribunals. Actually what was reported in the media about
the meeting of NJPMC dated 8 June 2013 discouraged P| candidates from
filing election petitions and many of them did not actually file petitions. We
believe that there was no necessity for initiating proceedings tor contempt of
court against our client
It is absolutely correct that our client holds the judiciary inh
respect being an important institution and third pillar of the State. It is also
correct that he did not mean to abuse or disrespect any member of the
judiciary. We hereby reiterate that our client has high respect and regard for
the judiciary as an institution and would continue to do so in the future
Our client continues to hold juticiary as an independent and highly respected
institution. Our client is committed to the supremacy of the constitution and
the constitutional role of judiciary
We believe that whatever has been said by our client was an
expression of disappointment due to the failure of the ECP and the judiciary to
dispense justice to him and his party at every level. The language used may
not be appropriate but unfortunately so is the nature of discourse during public
meetings and political press conferences. He did not mean any of the what you
have quoted him to have said. It was only an expression of protest and
disappointment stated rather in strong terms
We appreciate the exercise of self-restraint and tolerance on your part and
hope that you will continue to do so. Apart from being the holder of highest
judicial office in the land you have been a popular leader (not political) of this
country and the people of Pakistan have always looked up te you for
leadership in redressal of their grievances. We recall that during the course of
Lh.the meetings of the Bar Associations held in your honour during the lawyers’
movement, some of your supporters did not use very cautious language. You
ignored that because you thought and rightly so that such excessive expression
could happen in the intensity of feelings and sentiments over the colossal
injustice that had been done to your goodsell' and other members of judiciary
on 3" of November 2007. We hope and expect that such an understanding or
tolerance on your part would continue in respect of what has been said against
you and you would not take it as personal affront
There are no two opinions that while sitting on the bench you and your
colleagues rendered independent judgments without fear or favour particularly
against influential and powerful figures, Your services to the nation in
recovering huge amounts of public money would always be appreciated by the
people of Pakistan,
We just want to state that our client did not seek any’ revenge or expect any
“forced justice” from the Supreme Court. No one knows better than your
oodself that public protest is the right of all citizens which is never meant to
be an attempt to obtain favourable verdict. You have always been of the view
that lawyers had the right to protest against injustice done to you on 9 March
2007. independent of any proceedings that were pending before the Supreme
Court or the Supreme Judicial Council at that time. Such protests as we all
agreed were neither intended to foree the judiciary to render a particular
verdict nor were meant to divert the course of justice.
Regarding reference to Article 225 we may point out that the activist Supreme
Court under your leadership never took a narrow, contined or pedantic view
of the provisions of law and the Constitution. The Supreme Court under your
leadership always interpreted the Constitutional provisions liberally and
widened their scope and jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.
That is why a three member bench headed by your goodselt in Workers Party
of Pakistan y. Federation of Pakistan (P11) 2012 S.C.681) undertook an
extensive exercise to bring about electoral reforms within the confines of the
Constitution, All the known political parties were given notice to come up
with their proposals that would make the elections free. fair and transparent
under the Constitution. AIL major political parties participated in the
nput
proceedings and gave their valuable
‘The voters in Pakistan are grateful to you for issuing declarations. directions
and observations which would make the elections free, fair and transparent
Had these declarations. directions and observations been implemented by the
ECP. DROs and ROs and others in the electoral process. the results of the
clections would have been very different. PI fully participated in the
hearings of this case and made rich contribution. Is it then the fault of our
client if he expected trom the Supreme court of Pakistan that it could invoke
Article 184(3) for implementation of said judgment? When Article 225 could
not dissuade the Supreme court from undertaking the exercise of electoral
reforms under Article 184(3) and giving comprehensive judgment thereon.
then why should the judgment not be implemented within the framework of
the same provision” In any case. the Supreme Court on several occasions
wl16,
under your leadership had frequently interfered with the process of general
elections to ensure its faimess and transparency. Why would our client not
expect the same from the Supreme Court after holding of the polls?
No one knows beiter than your goodself that the exercise of justice through
election wibunals under Representation of Peoples Act (ROPA) has
completely failed over the years because the petitioners are denied justice over
a long period of time with the result that either the tenure of the concerned
assembly expires or candidates give up the pursuit of their cases in disgust and
frustration, This unfortunate history of disposal of clection petitions has
encouraged those who steal and rig the elections, They understand that by
2 electoral Fraud before or during or immediately after the pol! th
Would be successtul and would enjoy though illegitimately. the offices of the
members of Parliament or Provincial Assembly without any mandate from the
voters. The victim of such rigging or fraud on the other hand would be made
to run from pillar to post for many years in fruitless litigation. How is it any
fault of our client to expect from an activist Supreme Court to provide an
te redressal of complaints of PTI candidates by exercising. its
jurisdiction liberally under Article 184(3) by implementing ils own judgment
in this behalf”?
As explained above. our client has only expressed his disappointment and
frustration over denial of justive w him and his party after the polls. It is
absolutely correct that Chief Justice of Pakistan (CIP) should have nothing to
do with the appointment of DROs and ROs, Similarly it is expected that the
CIP or judiciary would not interact with them so that any complaints against
them would be objectively, impartially and justly addressed by them
Unfortunately during the most sensitive days of the general elections writing
to ROs directly and then addressing them at various places (like Karachi on §
April. Hyderabad on 6 April, Lahore on 7 April. Peshawar on 8 April and
Quetta on 14 April) created a general perception that these ROs have been
given the blessings and tree rein by the judiciary and that they could use sueh
blessings to do whatever they choose to do. Holding them clean and above
board afer the clections in the mecting of NIPMC on 8 June 2013. and
particularly when there was an outery against rigging and electoral fraud.
lurthered Strengthened such pereeption, It is respectfully stated that judiciary
should have stayed away from the electoral process to establish the pereeption
of its neutrality, impartiality and objectivity
There is no hypocrisy on the part of our Client. The elections beld in KPK
have been accepted as fair by all parties concerned. In any ease, our client has
always been willing to have any of the constituencies in KPK audited through
verification of thumb impressions
With due respect it is stated that allegation of rigging against ROs does not
involve their judicial office or character. Atter the appointment as DROs and
ROs, they were supposed to report to the HCP not to the judiciary We
believe that choice of words may not be correct. However you have always
shown understanding and tolerance towards language that was used during the
meetings and by speakers particularly in the days of lawyers’ movement In
\ f
Uh ‘ Meany case after lending the services of district judiciary to the ECP. the
judiciary should not feel compelled to protect them against allegations. It may
be correct that the purpose of NIPMC in interacting with DROs / ROs was to
ensure just. fair and honest elections. However. unfortunately, a different
perception has generally developed about the entire exercise
186 19. We have already stated above that you enjoy great respect for making
efforts for independence of judiciary in the country. However, there was no
nefarious design on the part of our client and he did not mean to cause injury
to your reputation
20 & 22 It was indeed not so intended by our elient
2a With due respect to your goodself and to the office that you have held.
we believe that it may not be appropriate for a former Chief lustice of
Pakistan to enter into any personal litigation, We are aware that your focus has
always been on rendering service to the country and did never care about
making money. We ure aware that in the past you have shown immense
courage and tolerance in the face of expression that could otherwise cause
mental agony and harassment particularly during the course of lawyers’
movement for restoration of judiciary. In any case. our client never meant to
cause any mental agony of torture or harassment or humiliation to you. We
deeply appreciate your desire to contribute to the causes of the downtrodden
Sections of society. Our client has always been working for public causes
particularly those meant for weaker sections of the society. He will expect
your contribution towards such causes in the future
us
25. We hope that you will reconsider the ide of entering into personal litigation,
Sincerely. /
fae
HAMID KHAN” ALIMAD AWAIS
6