On Friday 25th October Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa finally said adieu to the highest judicial forum (SC) when a traditional ceremony of full court reference was held to acknowledge his services, leadership and dedication to upholding the integrity of judiciary. However, the occasion was marred by the absence of six judges including Justice Mansoor Ali Shah. According to the constitutional arrangement prior to the 26th amendment which enshrined the principle of seniority for the appointment of Chief Justice he was the prospective candidate to occupy that August office. The absence of these judges from the reference confirmed the perceived polarization within the SC and the permeating impression of ‘our judges and their judges’. Their conduct also belied basic human courtesies and norms of gentlemanly behaviour. Most of the people view it as a disgraceful ploy on part of the judges to vent their venom and prejudice against the outgoing chief justice in such a clumsy way. They have set an unenviable example by their decision to stay away from the reference. However, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah not only stayed away from the reference but also thought it appropriate to spit venom against the CJ in a letter which he desired to be made part of the proceedings of the reference which is an unprecedented happening in the judicial history of the country. Honestly speaking the impression that one gathers after reading the contents of the letter is that these are the rants of a disgruntled man who after seeing his hope of becoming future CJ dashed to the ground has resorted to this un-ceremonial and demeaning course. No judge is supposed to wash the dirty linen in the public. His contention that the outgoing CJP instead of defending the judiciary compromised the very foundation of the rule of law is the most preposterous proposition considering the fact that Qazi Faez Isa acknowledging the supremacy of the parliament and the trichotomy of powers as enunciated in the constitution; nullified verdicts of SC that were inimical to the concept of the constitutional arrangement including Supreme Court Practices and procedure Act; opinion rendered on Article 63-A of the constitution which was ostensibly delivered to end Hamza Shahbaz government in Punjab; the verdict on hanging Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto which was widely believed as judicial murder; upheld the ECP and Peshawar High Court decision on not recognizing PTI as registered party and denial of symbol of ‘bat’ to it in the elections. On the question of allocation of reserved seats he strictly followed the constitution and Election Act 2017 instead of relying on personal likes and dislikes and biases which the majority of eight judges exhibited in complete contravention of the constitution. Regarding his assertion that Qazi Isa had little regard for the judgments of the court and had contemptuously and unashamedly suggested that they may not be implemented by the executive it can be arguably said that Qazi rightly and justifiably believed in court decisions delivered strictly according to the constitution and law and not wishes of the judges to fulfill political agenda of any political party. Mansoor Shah is probably referring to the additional note of CJ on the verdict and clarifications given by the majority judges regarding allocation of reserved seats in which he has contended that the verdict and clarifications were not binding on the ECP. He was right to point out that the review petitions on the case have not been taken up so far and consequently the verdict cannot be implemented till the disposal of the case. Another observation that Justice Mansoor has made is that the tenure of Qazi would be defined by pettiness, vindictiveness and a lowly approach to administrative matters having no grace or humility. I think all these traits can be easily attributed to Mansoor Shah himself who was clearly biased toward PTI and the party had minced no words about the fact that with him becoming CJ they would get the required relief from the apex court. The party also openly lobbied for his appointment leaving no doubt whose judge he was. An irrefutable evidence about this reality is the leakage of the Whatsapp message that the judge sent to his wife after delivering verdict on allocation reserved seat saying “I have given the decision in favour of your leader” That is the most flabbergasting revelation and an incriminating evidence of his tilt towards PTI. In his concluding remarks he said “To stand a reference and celebrate such a tenure would send a message that a chief justice can betray his institution, erode its strength, act petty and low and still be celebrated as an honourble servant of justice. I am sorry, I in good conscience cannot stand at a reference for such a chief justice” On this I really admire his audacity to speak about his good conscience and accusing the CJ of pettiness in spite of the fact that he himself was guilty of having conducted himself exactly in the way that he ascribes to Qazi. The verdict on reserved seat and his message to his wife in this regard need no further evidence about his soiled credentials. I really wonder how a judge of the apex court can stoop so low neglecting call of his conscience if he had any. What he did was not only morally wrong but also a violation of the code of conduct issued by the Supreme Judicial Council. No judge is supposed to wash the dirty linen in the public the way Justice Mansoor did. Even on that account he is liable to be held accountable for his indiscretions. The writer is a former diplomat and freelance columnist.